Replies to post #8615 on Qualcomm Inc (QCOM)

[JeffreyHF]

As you well know, Mschere, IDCC does not license any companies at the chipset level, but rather confines its licensing program to infrastructure and subscriber equipment suppliers.
As Qualcomm no longer sells handsets nor infrastructure, there appears to be no future license in the cards. Those patents not covered by the QCOM/IDCC settlement of 1994, simply cannot be passed through, and are between IDCC and the ultimate product suppliers.

[Eric]

IP Business Models in Wireless

mschere,

<< Question..Could you explain in simple terms two points.?. 1.Does a semiconductor producer fab or not, require a license to embed IP software of others....as long as the final OEM pays the IP owner under a license? >>

I'll do my best to try.

That depends on many things including the strength of the IP, and the IP holders strategy.

Specific to Qualcomm, the final OEM pays the IP owner (the major portion of Qualcomm's IP revenue), AND a semiconductor producer must license from Qualcomm and pays Qualcomm to manufacture ICs, although the semi producer may not pay if the OEM is licensed (The Nokia/TI case for ICs used by Nokia but not sold to others). It depends on the T&C of the license.

<< 2. Why would IDCC who does not produce chips ...care if Qualcomm sellls boatloads of IDCC embedded IP..provided they collect from the final user? >>

IDCC does (or at least has in the past, and may in the future) design chipsets produced by others.

IDCC would love to have Qualcomm selll boatloads of IDCC embedded IP <g>... provided, of course, "they collect from the final user," but they also might just like a little chunk paid by Qualcomm. If you are going to (attempt to) follow a business model in wireless, a darned good model to emulate would be Qualcomm's. Belay that. The BEST model to emulate would be Qualcomm's.

Best,

- Eric -