News Focus
News Focus
icon url

dr foo

11/17/08 3:22 PM

#32221 RE: par shooter #32219

As I stated, I was not there so I cannot confirm or deny what's in the PR. Obviously, our lawyers have done their DD and believe T-Mobile to be infringing. That's all that really matters to me.
icon url

plaintif2000

11/17/08 4:37 PM

#32223 RE: par shooter #32219

what is interesting is that the PR occured when leon was
very much incharge of the company operationally, leon was
a real doer so i really think that he did meet with people
at tmobile as well as many others.

the door in many respects has always been open to clyw UNTIL
companies have learned what clyw actually wants for its
technology thats the long and short of it, thats the rub

like it or not they now have to deal w/ a relentless and
powerful contingency lawyer, WK aint going away

glta

p2k
icon url

kcjazz

11/17/08 5:52 PM

#32229 RE: par shooter #32219

Guys, I have a hard time understanding how Calypso could do a "seemless" handover back and forth, to a wifi network from a GSM network and visa versa testing in 2003 when TMO didn't have a UMA switch provider with UMA software until june 2005. October 2006 for limited market trials, and May 2007 for nation wide rollout.

http://supercommnews.com/wireless/news/alcatel_spatial_uma_060705/

So, I'm curious how the lawyers are spin that on a "successful" test?