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: Jon Koplik who wrote (26224)	4/6/1999 7:31:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Respond to of 152472

O.T. - article about the dangers of really being a blabbermouth on Internet message boards. April 6, 1999 Case Raises Online Privacy Concerns Filed at 1:02 a.m. EDT By The Associated Press BOSTON (AP) -- It must have seemed like a perfectly anonymous place to gripe about work: an Internet message board where employees could hide behind code names as they complained about such topics as the company's stock price and its chief executive. But Raytheon Co. said the workers were also divulging company secrets by discussing such matters as rumored mergers and acquisitions, impending divestitures and possible defense contracts. Raytheon got subpoenas forcing Yahoo! Inc., the forum operator, to help pierce the anonymity the workers thought they enjoyed. Yahoo! says it always complies with valid court orders, and now two workers have reportedly resigned. Privacy advocates said Monday the case is a clear illustration about how fragile anonymity is on the Internet. Raytheon earlier this year sued a total of 21 people for discussing corporate business on the forum, one of many sites on the Internet that offer places to talk about specific companies. Some, if not all, of the defendants are Raytheon employees, although their identities aren't all known. Topics they discussed included the company's stock price and gripes about the chief executive. Chatters used aliases like ''Rayman-mass'' and ''RaytheonVeteran'' -- names they may have thought would protect their true identities. When Raytheon filed the suit in February, it had only those online handles. But armed with the subpoena, it went knocking on Yahoo!'s doors. Diane Hunt, a Yahoo! spokeswoman wouldn't say exactly how the company responded to the court orders, but she did say the company ''attempts to comply with validly issued subpoenas.'' Hunt said people who use Yahoo! services should be aware that while it won't sell or give away users' information, court orders are more serious. ''We notify the members in advance,'' Hunt said. ''In the message board terms and conditions, we make it clear.'' The Boston Globe reported Monday that two of the lawsuit's targets had left the company, apparently as a result of Raytheon's investigation. Raytheon spokesman David Polk would not comment on the report, nor would he say whether the company would terminate employees found to have divulged information on the forum. ''We're not going to release information as it pertains to employees,'' Polk said. ''Each of these cases will be looked at on an individual basis.'' The situation troubles Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. ''Companies should not disclose such information, even in response to a subpoena without some due process,'' he said. Rotenberg said he would like to see Internet companies more aggressively fight subpoenas requesting information on users. ''This is personal information that is being held in trust. There's a real privacy issue there,'' he said. An America Online spokesman confirmed that his company had also received a court order commanding it to provide information on the Raytheon chatters. Although the substance of the order couldn't be immediately confirmed, AOL is the most popular provider of Internet accounts, so some of the chatters could have their names registered with AOL. AOL has a policy similar to Yahoo!'s, but Rich D'Amato said whenever AOL receives such a subpoena in a civil case, it always notifies the member, giving the person 14 days to try to quash the subpoena. Only after that time has expired will the company turn over the information. The Globe also reported that Microsoft had also been hit with a Raytheon subpoena. A message left Monday for a Microsoft spokesman was not immediately returned. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (26224)	4/6/1999 10:39:00 AM
From: Valueman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Jon: Poor Tero. I do not even read his DeBry stuff any more Here is some of his brilliant insight from last year. There is a deeply surreal quality about the insistence that Qualcomm will somehow play a pivotal role in W-CDMA. All of the reports published by knowledgeable newspapers, trade publications and business weeklies here in Europe take the view that Qualcomm is badly sidelined by W-CDMA. And there is one item published by a flag-waving Qualcomm newsletter hinting that Qualcomm is somehow central in the W-CDMA. And this is taken as evidence that the Nokia-Ericsson consortium somehow depends on Qualcomm technology? Please. If this is so, where is the information about that? Don't you think that the company would have mentioned sonething about this while it was stunning the international investment community by last week's announcement? Anyone really thinks that Nokia and Ericsson would take the W-CDMA development this far, after six years of heavy R&D and only now notice that Qualcomm holds some mysterious key ingredient?

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (26224)	4/6/1999 11:01:00 AM
From: Valueman	Respond to of 152472

I spent a few minutes reading old Frezza Forum posts and old SI thread posts. Quite fun. Bottom line is that Gregg has been right all along, and Tero not. This is fun--more Tero gems: Holding some patents important to W-CDMA will not suddenly transform this company either. There are dozens of companies holding patents important to W-CDMA. Brass ring will go to companies that have already done years of R&D on W-CDMA and now have the inside edge in developing the hardware & handsets. American companies fought tooth and claw to stop Europe and Asia from accepting the Nordic W-CDMA proposal. And they lost. This is not a victory in disguise. Earth calling Qualcomm: you have a nice little company with good prospects. Trying to hype yourself into Intel/Microsoft of the millennium and feeding unrealistic expectations will result in a backlash. or similarly If Qualcomm's patents are as crucial to W-CDMA as Qualcomm execs now claim, how come nobody believes them? Wouldn't you expect the stock price to react to that in some fashion? Or is nobody really taking seriously the wild claims from Qualcomm's bosses anymore? now he tries to slam Gregg I'm quite certain that you are aware that most of the companies endorsing Qualcomm's CDMA are second string wannabes in telecom markets (most, not all). Korean vendors being a good example. They couldn't cut it in cut-throat GSM competition and chose the low road instead. While companies endorsing W-CDMA encompass five of the top five mobile telecom companies. Five out of top five. This is something else than the Korean companies... do you even remember their names? Average consumer sure doesn't. Even so, my bet on the Koreans coming into the W-CDMA fold stands. So the little tapdance you did around the endorsement issue isn't entirely convincing, even though it was remarkably well-coreographed.