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 (15556)	9/26/1998 12:22:00 AM
From: Quincy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I am confident the Patent Office is an awe-inspiring place. "Remember, the Q alledges that their patents cover both narrow band and broad band CDMA." Why not? I don't see how a court would want to set a precedence by allowing bandwidth to define the scope of a patent. How can something like "Power Control" be affected by bandwidth? Can Qualcomm confiscate Nokia's, Ericsson's, and Interdigitals TDMA IPR by changing the bandwidth? Can I get around any electric-related patent by changing its power input voltage requirements? Of course not. Every employer I have had (including the present one) has IPR they don't want to share. In most cases, it wasn't cheap to develop and I agree with their unwillingness to give away their competitive position. I can only imagine the amazement Qualcomm is enduring after a significant portion of the wireless industry is expecting them to do exactly that. Who are we to decide that ETSI deserves the "easy way out no charge" reward from Qualcomm? Isn't ETSI the exact same entity that has prevented Qualcomm's IS95 system or GSM overlay from being deployed ANYWHERE in Europe? qualcomm.com Why would Vodaphone have participated and invested in these trials if they had no interest in implementing the technology? I don't understand how you can assume ETSI, an organization that chooses its votes-awarded-per-entity based on last years infastructure sales dollars, can make a decision that is in my best interest. Ultimately, a third party will compare the ITU proposals. Then, we will know if ETSI/Ericsson/GSM-NA claims of harming WCDMA by unification is true. Congratulations on your $60 TDMA phone. I hope you understand my fear that AT&T's decision to forego profits on LD and roaming charges cannot be a ringing endorsement for the IS136 phone standard. Why cut off profit streams and start a industry revolution considering Sprint is one of many in a position to match their deal?