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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (1261)	12/18/1998 9:50:00 AM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

You of course chose to ignore the central proposition of my post, which was that everything you're saying depends on QCOM either capitulating or WCDMA not needing Q IPR. Perhaps you're trying not to be too provocative? My money is on the table and says neither of these things will come to pass. Q will not be railroaded and will if necessary let the whole thing go to court. Now how will your argument stand up under this scenario? Dave

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (1261)	12/19/1998 5:37:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 34857

"For the question on GSM. Remember that the total royalties for GSM are very high. The firms controlling the IPR can basically keep whomever they want out of the market." Surely there are no royalty fees for GSM production. Tell me it isn't true. We have been told how Nokia and the VW40 people love humanity so much that they think CDMA technology should be freely available or at the most a small amount to repay the cost of development. Owners of property should not stand in the way of a whole industry, millions of prospective subscribers and the whole world. This is surely a mistake. YOU know it isn't true don't you Tero? Message 6904136 What a litany of festering troubles those Eurokleptocrats have created. Maurice