Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Clarksterh who wrote (14180)	8/27/1998 1:09:00 AM
From: Ingenious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Clark, I think you have the right idea. One additional thing to note about qcom's CDMA is that it is just one type of CDMA; namely IS-95 CDMA. CDMA is actually just a combination of technologies packaged together (e.g. spread spectrum, code division multiplexing, wide band communication, psuedorandom encoding, viterbi decoding, soft handoffs, etc. etc.). Thus, it might be possible to bypass CDMA by creating a bigger better fatter standard and filing patents on it. Any comments?

To: Clarksterh who wrote (14180)	8/27/1998 1:29:00 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Clark: RE: "It would be nice to know with more certainty that Qualcomm has it wrapped up with no easy bypass available, but only an expert in the field who has been prospecting in the CDMA IPR field would know how thoroughly Qualcomm claimed all of the best IPR." I feel like a broken record here. First off, all US Patents are presumed to be valid. Furthermore, less than 1% of all patents are actually worth anything. Most companies upon finding out that their patents are actually worth something do the following: file an application for a re-examination of the patent to make sure the scope of the patent is not too broad. Also, there are patent attourneys in the field which specialize in patent validity. I would assume that the Q has done both. As I have been saying on this board and on the nokia thread, just b/c someone gets a patent doesn't mean that another party can't use it. The other party could patent a different implementation. dave