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: DaveMG who wrote (16492)	10/14/1998 10:43:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 152472

Dvae, I think we need better press channels. All day I was trying to figure out why the spikeup of the Q. After the market closed, about 3-4pm PT, the announcement came out on Yahoo. I guess the analysts have a better news service, or we don't know where to look for the info. Regards, Michael

To: DaveMG who wrote (16492)	10/15/1998 12:45:00 AM
From: Asterisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Portrayals, schmortrayals... Look the reality so far is that QCOM seems to have blocking IPR, and until that issue is resolved everything else matters not. I saw a post here earlier that said that Ericcsson has 19 patents in relation to the rake receiver and QCOM only has 15. WHO CARES. That is like saying I have a better car than you, WHO CARES. When the pissing contest starts the ONLY thing that matters is the quality and depth of the patents. If the 15 patents from QCOM cover all of the relevant functionality of rake recievers and Ericcsson patented the name then E is sunk. I have no idea as to the relative technical quality of either position. I think that people get easily distracted when one talks about patents. All a patent consists of is a piece of paper that says that on this day at this time I came up with a novel idea. Whether it is a new way of applying an old technology or it is a brand new technology it is still a patent. If QCOM got to the basic use of a rake receiver in CDMA before Ericcsson did then Ericcsson doesn't have a leg to stand on. If all of Ericcssons patents are on uses in TDMA or GSM then it is screwed. It is just like the past lawsuit w.r.t. Motorola and the vibrating alarm that they patented for pagers. It is a great idea for pagers but I believe that some court found that they had no right to expand their scope of their patents to include the Q phone. Now I am sure that some patent lawyer (Dave) will come along and poke little holes (or big ones, I don't care) in this post but just remember one thing it isn't the amount of patents that matters it is their technical quality and applicability to this specific application.