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: Maurice Winn who wrote (16897)	10/21/1998 7:00:00 PM
From: lazarre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

To all....I thought this take on Q's share price was interesting; check it out: stockselector.com L.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (16897)	10/21/1998 7:11:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Maurice - re WLL in USA using cdma2000, won't that be a major advantage for all those stuck on twisted pair? With spectrum costs hugely lower than C-block prices, cheaper infrastructure, SiGe chips and all that jazz, won't the economics of wireless make WLL desirable pretty well everywhere, including the USA? Maybe. If ADSL pans out as really being 1Mbps then I wouldn't be so sure that WLL will suplant wireline where wireline is already available. But it almost certainly will kill wireline where it isn't already installed. Also, you said in Yahoo! ... How come it took L M Ericsson nearly 10 years to assert their 1988 patent which they now claim covers everything - IS-95, cdma2000 and their vapourwear system? I would agree except that they could argue that they didn't file suit until CDMAOne became operational. Clark PS Just a note of correction as I re-read my Yahoo! post in your SI post. My post was a reply to someone's comment that the claims on patent 5109528, Ericsson's patent on soft-handoff, were pretty broad and almost all forms of soft-handoff would be covered. My reply was intended to be in regards to that particular patent, not all Ericsson patents.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (16897)	10/21/1998 8:37:00 PM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Brilliant insight, Maurice: "Since L M Ericsson well into the 1990s denied it was possible to implement these soft handoff and other patents which they now assert, then they fail the implementation test. How can they claim a patent for something which they claim is impossible?" It seems rather inconguous, doesn't it? Can't work but we invented it (even though we didn't know we did) and have a blocking patent! I don't claim to know the vagaries of patent law, but it is an appealing retort. Nevertheless, the patent office seems to have approved the addition, but I would guess that Qcom can now challenge the patent.