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: Dave who wrote (15510)	9/25/1998 4:32:00 PM
From: Ramus	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Dave..All.... I'm unclear about something. I thought I heard that ETSI(or some European standards body) had mandated that any 3G standard being submitted had to be free of IPR uncertainty by Dec 31 this year. If this is true, and if the Q has not licensed its IPRs for use in W-CDMA by that time, does it mean that W-CDMA is dead and will not be approved as a standard? W.

To: Dave who wrote (15510)	9/25/1998 8:31:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Dave, Am I missing something?Isn't Q talking about a converged standard whereby all existing networks, TDMA/GSM and CDMAone have clear upgrade paths? davemg

To: Dave who wrote (15510)	9/28/1998 3:40:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Dave, Why are you limiting the fight to just Ericy? As of right now, Nokia, Ericsson, Alcatel, Siemens, Lucent, Motorolla, and others have not licensed out any patents the Q feels necessary for W-CDMA to work. Nokia, Motorolla and Lucent all all licensees of CDMA. They licensed what Qualcomm was willing to license, but Qualcomm stated that these licenses can not be use in W-CDMA unless Qualcomm agrees. I am not sure about Alcatel and Siemens and their status regarding CDMAOne. The reason I am limiting the fight to Ericy is because Ericy is the principal obstacle to a converged standard. THey tried to undermine CDMA and Qualcomm since the beginning. Now last thing they want to do is to admit "They are right, we are wrong and we lied to you all these years". That's why the main reason for existance of this thing called W-CDMA is that it is different from CDMAOne. That is another un-substantiated claim. Why would a company, who is provided a clear upgrade path from their current, existing system switch to a new system. W-CDMA allows companies which system TDMA/GSM equipment to upgrade their existing equipment to W-CDMA. Why would any company selling CDMAOne now with clear path to CDMA200 junk all their investment for a pipe dream called W-CDMA? W-CDMA may or may not happen. One of the press releases stated that it may take 5 years for all the dust on W-CDMA to settle. CDMA200 will be available as early as next year, and the upgrade path from CDMAOne is straight forward. No IPR hurdles to overcome. No committees to please. No government heavy hand. Now, about a hypothetical IP suit. I would not wish that upon the Q or any other company/ies. These law suits are usually long and drawn out and tend to allow all the parties involved to lose their corporate focus. Furthermore, have scores of patent and litigation attorneys are not cheap. Qcom has done very well in the courts. They seem to have a competent legal team. They are up to the task. There are number of ongoing cases right now, where Qcom is involved, and it doesn't seem to have any negative effect on the company. Joe