QualComm Sued -- No new phones for CDMA or 3G for now -- CDMA networks going?

[jerry 12]

Originally Posted by Fire14

Because that would mean more jobs for people here in the US.

Actually I am sure there is some reason either being cost to manufacture or lack of the proper facilities to do the manufacturing.

they use to make phones here but moved every thing over seas for cheap labor.

[Fire14]

Originally Posted by jerry 12

they use to make phones here but moved every thing over seas for cheap labor.

Exactly, but we are our own worst enemies with this, we want everything cheap & that's the only way these companies can do it.
Eventually it's going to come back & bite them 1 day.

[rytard]

lol................

this will suck* for most people

[jerry 12]

Originally Posted by Fire14

Exactly, but we are our own worst enemies with this, we want everything cheap & that's the only way these companies can do it.
Eventually it's going to come back & bite them 1 day.

if you look around their is hardy anything made in the USA any more lke TVs / cd player / vcrs & ect.gm has been knocked down by Toyota.this country is getting in bad shape very fast and to the most part its our own fault.

[Fire14]

ITC reaffirms partial ban on Qualcomm chips

Qualcomm continues to pursue presidential veto and federal appeal

A partial ban on the importation of new handset models containing Qualcomm Inc.’s 3G chips will remain in effect as the chip vendor’s appeal is heard in a federal court and considered by the Bush administration.

The United States International Trade Commission ruled yesterday that its four-prong test—a test also used by the federal circuit courts—to determine whether a stay should be granted had not been met. Thus the ban that officially began on June 7 remains in effect, barring new handset models containing Qualcomm’s W-CDMA or CDMA2000 1x EV-DO chipsets.

Handset models imported prior to the June 7 ban are exempted, thus the ITC’s term “limited exclusion order” is rendered in plain language as a “partial ban.”

The decision came despite urgent filings by Qualcomm and a slew of wireless players who requested a stay of the ITC’s ban while the issue is considered by a federal appeals court. Qualcomm had been joined by the nation’s four, top-tier network operators—Verizon Wireless, AT&T Inc., Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc.—as well as leading handset vendors including Motorola Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., LG Electronics Co. Ltd. and Kyocera Wireless Corp.

Broadcom Corp. and the ITC’s own investigative attorney opposed the efforts to stay the handset ban. Broadcom had brought the original complaint of patent infringement against Qualcomm and won the handset ban on June 7 as a means to protect one of its patents pertaining to power management.

Broadcom issued a statement lauding the ITC’s commitment to the protection of intellectual property “essential to American competitiveness and innovation in global markets.”

“We're disappointed with the ITC's denial of the stay despite some commissioners agreeing that a stay should be granted,” said Christine Trimble, a Qualcomm senior director. “However, we can now proceed with our motion to stay that has been filed with the federal circuit court of appeals. Qualcomm and its industry partners are focused on obtaining a stay through the federal circuit and on presidential veto.”

The ITC ruled yesterday that four criteria had not been met by Qualcomm and other filers, who had to establish that:

1, an appeal would be likely to succeed on its merits,

2, irreparable harm would occur without a stay,

3, issuance of a stay would not irreparably harm other parties, and

4, the public interest favored a stay.

In the wake of the ITC’s decision against a stay, those opposed to the ban continue to pursue two other legal avenues. One is issuance of a presidential veto of the ITC decision, which requires action by the executive branch through its U.S. Trade Representative. According to the Washington, D.C., law firm of Stifel Nicolaus, which specializes in telecom, media and technology regulation, the last such presidential veto of an ITC decision came more than two decades ago. Yet the law firm issued a statement that while Qualcomm’s request for a veto has “a good chance,” the firm believes the process will “go to the wire”—in other words, a veto if granted would come at the end of the 60-day period that began June 7.

The other avenue for seeking reversal of the ITC decision is through the federal appeals court process, which Qualcomm has initiated.

Both efforts remain ongoing in the wake of the ITC’s affirmation of its partial ban.

Qualcomm said earlier this week that the partial ban would affect the importation of its MediaFLO handsets for mobile TV, but did not mention specific models. The Qualcomm statement thus appeared to be an attempt to heighten the sense of the impact the ITC’s ban would have on innovative new services, the public interest and the ecosystem of businesses involved in MediaFLO-related services.

AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless have both selected Qualcomm’s MediaFLO as their technology of choice in launching mobile TV services. Verizon has already launched its service and AT&T expects to do so later this year.

ITC reaffirms partial ban on Qualcomm chips :: RCR Wireless News

[ace41690]

Originally Posted by jerry 12

if you look around their is hardy anything made in the USA any more lke TVs / cd player / vcrs & ect.gm has been knocked down by Toyota.this country is getting in bad shape very fast and to the most part its our own fault.

I though toyota provided thousands of american jobs. Just becauses its a japanese company doesnt mean they do EVERYTHING in Japan. For example, Honda is a Japanese company, yet my car was manufactured in Canada eh

[strunke]

Originally Posted by ace41690

I though toyota provided thousands of american jobs. Just becauses its a japanese company doesnt mean they do EVERYTHING in Japan. For example, Honda is a Japanese company, yet my car was manufactured in Canada eh

That's true, but compared to how much a domestic company contributes to the US economy, the money for Japanese cars is going to japan first not the US. Personally I would rather have it go to a rich guy in the US then Japan...

But here are some facts from Time Magazine.....

GM- 150,000 workers, health care costs $1,600/car, 28 US plants (Up to 12 US plants planning to close by 2009), sales $173b
Toyota- 38,340 workers, health care costs $350/car, 9 plants (opening two more plants in the US), sales $160.9b
Ford- 128,000 workers, health care costs $1,200/car, 18 plants (8 closing by '09), sales $143.3b
Nissan- 16,000 workers, $250/car, 6 us plants, sales $81.6b
Honda- 29,000 workers, $350/car, 7 plants (1 new plant planned to opened), sales $66.6b
Chrysler- 63,788 workers, $1,500/car, 25 plants (just expanded 12 plants, but planning to close 5 by '09), sales $64b

The biggest problem I have is the perception that the hondas and toyotas have overall better quality. It's incorrect. This may have been true 5-7 years ago but is not true with the cars in the last couple years. Granted there are some individual cars and models that are better quality, but there are just as many on the domestic side that are the same way or better.

It is our own fault, anyway it's irrelevant, people will start to realize this eventually and it will balance back out.....the biggest issue is will all the Big 3 automakers survive that time.