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: Gregg Powers who wrote (18382)	11/16/1998 2:48:00 PM
From: Rajala	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

>Let's face it, philosophically I believe that if I invent >something, call it CDMA, and it proves better than your product, >called it TDMA-based GSM, then you should NOT be able to "invent" >a competing CDMA-based product that incorporates my technology >without compensating me for the economic opportunity cost. This >is the major thrust of our disagreement. "You should NOT be able to invent"? Really? You can easily invent as many CDMAs as you like and you can incorporate all the technology of the others as well. That is correct behaviour de facto and de juro. UNLESS there is a court tested patent that you can't go around. So is there? I don't know, yet. But "proof" like "they claimed that hostage...etc..etc..)is BS when weighted against ERICY's official message, which is crystal clear. Is this important? Let me only say that should I fully believe one day that Q has no valid patents over WCDMA, I would be off this thread for good (for you guys, something to look forward to). - rajala

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (18382)	11/16/1998 3:48:00 PM
From: Raymond	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg! I think we jut have to wait and see what the outcome will be of the trial or some other agreement. But I like to comment one thing. Have you forgotten that Bill Frezza was the former director of marketing and business development for Ericsson? No I haven't forgotten.I hadn't heard about the guy before reading about him on the SI and in the Frezza forum.But I am pretty sure about one thing.He was not director of marketing and business development for Ericsson .He was probably some marketing boss in the American company.But if he was the director for whole Ericsson I would have heard about him.But that doesn't matter even if he had been the CEO of Ericsson.If one guy is not employed in the company any more his expressed opinions can't be blamed on the company. If Ericsson would pay someone to argue against CDMA.Would they pay to someone that has been employed in the company before. That wouldn't be so smart./ R