Qualcomm, Nokia Patent Agreement Ends Next Week
Nokia's CFO
Nokia's CFO said "You don't want everybody to have 4.5 per cent royalty rates so that when you add it up the device has an unbearable tax on it."
First, I don't know if his sentence really makes sense. Second, this is a key component of ALL CDMA devices. Call it a tax or whatever. It is a price you pay to use this technology. All phone vendors that use this technology pay this "tax", so it is an even playing field within each carrier. This *should* create a price advantage for the GSM carriers. If the CDMA profit margin is too small because of attempts to compete with the GSM prices, then don't make CDMA phones (not like Nokia actually makes them anyway). The carrier decides which technology to use. If it costs the phone vendor mo...
(continues)
First, I don't know if his sentence really makes sense. Second, this is a key component of ALL CDMA devices. Call it a tax or whatever. It is a price you pay to use this technology. All phone vendors that use this technology pay this "tax", so it is an even playing field within each carrier. This *should* create a price advantage for the GSM carriers. If the CDMA profit margin is too small because of attempts to compete with the GSM prices, then don't make CDMA phones (not like Nokia actually makes them anyway). The carrier decides which technology to use. If it costs the phone vendor mo...
(continues)
...
This is actually about Nokia wanting smaller royalties due on WCDMA devices (GSM 3g), not Nokia complaining about their CDMA division(like BT Guy said, Pantech) paying royalties
...
I realized that my post was a bit mis-leading after I submitted it. I don't see any means to edit a post. I am trying to get across a point that if you don't want to pay for a technology, then don't use it. When you are creating a specification, make implementations that are not vulnerable to Qualcomm royalties. If it is the carriers that are mandating these technologies, then they should be responsible for considering the additional costs incurred by using them.
I am going to go out on a limb and say that Nokia had something to do with the creation of the WCDMA specification. If you are going to release something on that scale, you should thoroughly check if it infringes on patents before you release it. Either the legwork wasn't...
(continues)
I am going to go out on a limb and say that Nokia had something to do with the creation of the WCDMA specification. If you are going to release something on that scale, you should thoroughly check if it infringes on patents before you release it. Either the legwork wasn't...
(continues)
...
i'm not sure what part Nokia had in the finalization of the UMTS standard. Regardless, that's not the issue here. Nokia's argument is that WCDMA is a completely different technology from CDMA and that Qualcom had less of a role in WCDMA's creation than that of CDMA. Therefore, why pay qualcomm the same in royalties? I don't think they want to avoid paying Q for their intellectual properties, moreso they are trying to argue that those patents in question are less relevant, and therefore should command less $ in royalties.
...
Remember one important point. If you started a company to make GSM phones you would be paying over 18% in royalties.
...
To who? I'm only asking this because I'd like to know who owns the GSM patent(s).
...
The patent dispute is not with CDMA2000 phones, it is with WCDMA, or Wideband CDMA, the progression in the GSM family of technologies.
The dispute is that WCDMA was developed independent of Qualcomm, and it was found that patents were infringed, but Qualcomm wants to charge more for royalties on a system it did not develop than the system it did develop.
Please let me know if the previous paragraph is incorrect, but that is my understanding.
Also, I would think that the CDMAone patents should be getting close to expiring?
The dispute is that WCDMA was developed independent of Qualcomm, and it was found that patents were infringed, but Qualcomm wants to charge more for royalties on a system it did not develop than the system it did develop.
Please let me know if the previous paragraph is incorrect, but that is my understanding.
Also, I would think that the CDMAone patents should be getting close to expiring?
...
Yes this is exactly what I said earlier on nokia patents. It is not directed at CMDMA2000. We Nokia is getting out of the business and using ODM vendors in the future for CDMA development. All development will be done by most companies located outside the US in southeast asia. They are exactly doing what most analyst say, getting out of R&D development and cutting cost to boot profits in the CDMA Arena.
...
This forum is closed.
