Home  ›  News  ›

Ban Halts Release of New 3G Phones

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 10 replies

monopoly??

pennyless10

Jun 8, 2007, 8:19 PM
rich... wouldn't anti monopoly laws keep Broadcom from having 100% of the market share for 3g phones in america? 😕
...
colione112

Jun 8, 2007, 9:03 PM
It's not necessarily about a monopoly. It's about the big Q not wanting to pay royalties for the technology. (and claiming it operates differently than Broadcom's tech)
...
bobjoisone

Jun 9, 2007, 9:40 AM
no not if they split it among-est many company's that they own than they can control all of it and never have to pay the royalty's
...
katrina

Jun 9, 2007, 12:54 PM
broadly speaking a patent grants its owner a monopoly on the thing patented. If Broadcom ownes the patent, they are legally entitled to a monopoly (whether its morally right or not is another story). But there is no reason someone else can't develop a competing 3G technology or one which acts similarly but doesn't directly use Broadcom's patent. Or of course they can just license the technology from Broadcom. Its sorta like how before, all CDMA equipment had to be licensced from Qualcomm
...
nextel18

Jun 9, 2007, 1:54 PM
I think this is a huge issue when it comes to this country because if the Government issues the company a patent or patents for hard work and spending billions in R&D they deserve that monopolistic sense for the length of the patent. It is only fair and then companies like Broadcom or what not can pay license fees to use the patents from Qualcomm or vice versa. (This is with any industry not just this one.) Then now the big companies can’t figure out, mainly Broadcom in this situation, a good compensation royalty rate and this entire situation, the ban, hurts consumers. Then when they issue patents, competitors cry and say they aren’t charging appropriately or monopolistic ways. Of course the royalty rate should be fair and shouldn’t be more...
(continues)
...
algorithmplus

Jun 9, 2007, 5:50 PM
nextel18 said:
Of course the royalty rate should be fair and shouldn’t be more than what fair value is, but if companies won’t even negotiate in good faith, in this case Broadcom with Qualcomm, it will hurt consumers and then hurts innovation.


I disagree on the 'hurts innovation' part. This will give competing technologies a chance to attempt to proliferate the market where Qualcomm has tried to maintain a monopoly. It will give the GSM family a boost. Now, it's not fair to that the companies who chose CDMA2000 or QC to supply chips to suffer, but it was Qualcomm who violated the patent. Qualcomm put up a pretty big fuss of patents in the EU, and now is itself a victim of its own actions.
...
nextel18

Jun 10, 2007, 9:06 PM
Well it is difficult to go against Qualcomm, as you know they are in every single technology there is out there and it is tough because they are securing many deals in many areas of the country. If patents and payments were in question then nothing would go on. It is the same thing of not issuing any patents at all.
...
sangyup81

Jun 9, 2007, 1:29 PM
The monopoly laws only kick in if Broadcom does something to keep competitors out. In this case, it's gov't doing it for them.
...
nextel18

Jun 9, 2007, 1:49 PM
See this is the issue when it comes to this country and monopoly because when any kind of company wants to get the leg up they spend billions of dollars in R&D and because of that effort they receive a patent or patents for that product. Then their competitors complain about that and sue them. Patents are a key asset to many companies, including Qualcomm, so if people are going to continue to sue them over nonsense then it isn’t right or fair because then Qualcomm and others wouldn’t apply and get issued patents which means that will hurt technology growth and raise the prices for consumers. The fact that the ITC ruled on this situation as a ban is pathetic because they ban chips that have 3G data for both HSPA and DO because Qualcomm violat...
(continues)
...
algorithmplus

Jun 9, 2007, 5:57 PM
Qualcomm is not the only supplier of chips in the world, and in fact of world market share, assuming a global economy, is not a huge issue. It is only a huge issue for companies who rely on QC...AT&T wants to launch MediaFLO, if I'm not mistaken, which would use the QC chips in question. Most GSM family handsets would not be affected.

However, overturning the ban without the co-operation of Broadcom would also send the message that large companies in the United States who have a large market share don't have to pay royalties to other companies, yet insist other companies pay royalties to them.
...
nextel18

Jun 10, 2007, 9:04 PM
Yea it is a touchy subject but this ban was based on the patent that was infringed that has to deal with power consumption. However, it has nothing really to do with it. I think if they wanted to show power was to issue that ban but a stay until something can be worked out. Make these two companies sit down and actually settle. These lawsuits and issues are only hurting consumers not them.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.