Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Vegas, thanks for your reasons why.
israt
israt, ASM on Wednesday. Insiders are not selling even though they could. I am interested if they continued buying back stock, any additional news on Lenovo, and any other news that they can share including updates on the quarter. They will probably talk about AI as every other company has done so, but I want to hear how many patents and if any are considered essential.
On the new Form 4's they sold only the fractional shares. That makes me very happy. Wednesday should be a very good day....
Questions Abound On EU Plan For New Essential Patent Rules
By Ryan Davis ·Law360 (May 1, 2023, 10:35 PM EDT) --
The European Union's call to create a new body to set royalty rates for standard-essential patents before lawsuits could be filed has drawn a skeptical response, with experts questioning how the plan would work and whether it would achieve its goal of streamlining disputes.
The European Commission released its proposal on Thursday, saying the move is aimed at bringing more transparency and predictability to a complex area of the law that has led to heated disputes and litigation.
When patents must be used in a product in order for it to operate on industry standards like Wi-Fi and 5G, the patent owner pledges to license them on terms that are fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory, or FRAND. However, what constitutes such a rate often spurs legal clashes, and the EU proposal could reshape them in unpredictable ways.
Tom Cotter, a professor at University of Minnesota Law School, said that since rates are now set through litigation in courts around the world, which can lead to inconsistent results and forum shopping, "there is certainly is a lot of discussion around the world about the need to come up with a better, more efficient system for determining FRAND royalties."
"There's a lot to be applauded in trying to do that," he said. "But I'm not sure that this particular proposal is going to go forward as is because of the many objections that people have raised to it."
The European Commission called for a new "competence center" to be established within the European Union Intellectual Property Office, or EUIPO, which would create a central registry of standard-essential patents in force in the EU and conduct checks of whether the patents are in fact essential.
The proposal also calls for the center to operate a system to set a global FRAND rate for the patents when the parties cannot agree, with such a determination becoming a requirement before litigation could be filed in the EU. The commission said the nonbinding rate would be set within nine months, and would "limit the duration of otherwise protracted licensing negotiations."
The many questions spurred by the idea of creating an entirely new framework for standard-essential patents disputes have focused on the role of the EUIPO, whether the new body could meet the task being set out for it, and what would happen once a rate was set.
The EUIPO currently only registers trademarks and designs and has no involvement in patents, so its central position in the process is puzzling to many observers.
Marianne Schaffner of Reed Smith LLP's Paris office said that she found the proposal "quite concerning" since the key role is given to "an office which has no competence in patent law."
Moreover, she said that requiring patent owners to register their patents with the new body, and get determinations on whether they are essential and what a FRAND rate would be before litigation could begin, "adds so much complexity, and it slows down so much the possibility of having a decision from a court, that it's not business-minded to me."
While the proposal envisions the new body coming up with a FRAND determination within nine months, "I think that's very ambitious," said Andrew Sharples of the law firm EIP's London office. "To do a meaningful analysis in that time is going to be difficult, I think."
When the new body does set a FRAND rate, the fact that it would not be binding raises questions about what the parties are supposed to do with that information, attorneys said.
The commission "appears to have realized that the nonbinding nature just facilitates more delay," Sharples said. As a result, he noted that the proposal includes language stating that if one party commits to abide by the determination, it can terminate the process and file suit, putting pressure on the other side.
"They're trying to put in place incentives for parties to actually abide by their ruling, but query whether people will," he said, especially since there's no way of knowing at this stage what kind of rates the new body will set.
The EU aim for the proposal appears to be to "reduce litigation by giving the parties some idea of what a FRAND rate would be," said Amol Parikh of McDermott Will & Emery LLP. "But it's a nonbinding rate, so I'm curious to see if the courts will go through a similar analysis and come up with a similar rate."
In addition, Parikh noted that much about the proposed new process remains unclear, including who would be hired by the EUIPO to make the determinations, what experience they will have and what types of decisions they might make.
"Those are the types of questions that stakeholders are going to have to determine whether the regulations are workable in practice," he said.
Brian Pomper, executive director of the Innovation Alliance, whose members include owners of standard-essential patents like Qualcomm and InterDigital, said that a new body to determine licensing rates is "really going to hurt the technology developers."
When companies create inventions that are essential to industry standards, then are told, "'you're not going to be able to license this on the open market, you are going to have to take the price that we are going to be willing to allow you to charge,' that's a not a recipe for technological success," said Pomper, a partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.
He said the proposal appears driven by the concerns of companies like automakers that implement standards in their products and want to pay lower prices to license patents. "I can tell you ... it's not the patent creators and innovator companies that are going to the EU and saying, 'You need to set up a system to set prices in our marketplace,'" Pomper said.
In contrast, the proposal was welcomed by Alex Moss, executive director of the Public Interest Patent Law Institute, a group that says it's dedicated to ensuring that the patent system promotes access to technology for the public's benefit.
The proposed new system would provide more transparency about standard-essential licensing information, which is now largely confidential and can't be accessed by anyone other than patent owners except through litigation, she said.
"So right now, they have an enormous information advantage and that's really how this changes the game," Moss said. "The value of your patent shouldn't reflect an information asymmetry."
In addition, she noted that standard-essential patent litigation is extremely expensive, so the possibility that the new body could reduce disputes would free up money to use for salaries or research and development, to the benefit of both sides.
Others said if the system were to be adopted, it's not clear how it could impact the behavior of patent owners and potential licensees who implement standards in their products.
"It might not have the desired effect. It might simply result in either implementers or owners going to other countries to try to get determinations," rather than dealing with the framework in the EU, said Cotter of the University of Minnesota Law School.
Likewise, Reed Smith's Schaffner described the proposal as "a gift that the EU commission is making to the U.K." Since the courts in that country have said they can make FRAND determinations without all the steps being contemplated in Europe, the U.K. would likely become a more appealing litigation venue if the policy took effect, she said.
For now, it's far from certain that the European Commission's proposal will become a reality. It must be approved by the EU countries and the European Parliament to take effect and will likely face fierce lobbying. "If this is ever implemented, I imagine it's going to look much different than the proposal," said Parikh of McDermott.
"There's a lot of uncertainty and at least from many quarters, I think, some degree of unhappiness with the current proposals," Cotter said. "So that makes me at least somewhat skeptical that it is going to be adopted in its present format."
--Editing by Emily Kokoll and Jill Coffey.
Paullee I hope Jones is going to buy a large number of shares.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AND THEN....and then ...and then.
-----------------------------------------------------
and then along came Jones.............
RE A.I....i think its a poorly chosen choice of words....there is nothing artificial about the human intelligence that went into creating it.....its simply the next level of computing.....the reason i think its poorly named....is because we have quickly realized that A.I.....can easily stand for ARTIFICIAL INFORMATION ....which was designed to deceive
InterDigital’s Alec Brusilovsky Elected Vice Chair of the ETSI Industry Specification Group on Securing AI
Company Release - 6/1/2023
WILMINGTON, Del., June 01, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- InterDigital, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC), a mobile and video technology research and development company, announced the election of R&I Principal Engineer Alec Brusilovsky to Vice Chair the ETSI Industry Specification Group on Securing Artificial Intelligence (ETSI ISG SAI).
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) is comprised of a variety of committees and industry specification groups that contribute to the study and understanding of critical technologies or features before they are considered for standardization. The ETSI ISG SAI explores three key areas, including the use of AI to enhance conventional security, how to mitigate against AI-generated attacks, and ways to secure AI from attack. Amidst the growing interest and commercial utilization of AI/ML tools, the ETSI ISG SAI works to create standards to preserve and improve the security of AI.
“The AI landscape is rapidly evolving, and we have great faith in Alec’s leadership as Vice Chair of the ETSI ISG on Securing AI as he contributes his expertise to shaping nuanced and necessary standards to uphold the security of AI,” said Rajesh Pankaj, CTO, InterDigital. “AI holds revolutionary potential for our technologies and the ways we interact, and through Alec’s leadership and our continued research, we are committed to stay at the forefront of this dialogue and efforts to shape the standards that help define our future security.”
Alec has been contributing to the ETSI ISG SAI since 2020, and while serving as Rapporteur for the group, he led three study items dealing with different facets of AI security, including the role of hardware in AI security, privacy considerations of AI/ML systems, and security considerations of using AI/ML techniques in the telecoms sector.
Alec will begin his two-year term immediately, serving alongside vice-chairs from Huawei and SBS, with Cadzow Communications chairing the industry specification group. You can learn more about the ETSI ISG SAI here.
TC, came for happy hour, stayed, and still there…last trade of the day.
Monterey...did 5 o'clock charlie wave to the crowd??
AND THEN....and then ...and then....teeeheee
IDCC share price is up $2.46 in after hours market but only 1 share traded at that price. 5 o’clock Charlie?
My3sons87 - About 275k shares changed hands during the last few minutes of trading today with the stock price sprinting to the up side for the final business day of May. The company made it clear during the last webcast that they "... weren't done buying yet". At that point in time, there remained $175m available in the authorized buy back and I believe that they have been chipping away at it.
I also believe that there are some pleasant surprises on the video side of wireless and AI.
leon...a little back and fill is ok...we've just come off of 2 big moves...first the tender and then the earnings news....idc will lull everyone back to sleep and then.....
Is it that no news is good news, or simply there is no IDCC news anywhere on the planet at this time. Including the multiple court cases around the globe.
I saw the same thing you did...I interpreted it as a forced short covering ...right at margin time....for all we know...the short got passed on from one account to another....all I know...is they are too deep into this stock at this point in time...I'm not sure what their end game is going to look like
Teecee56, on May 18th 760K of shares traded were short.
vegas....thats a healthy increase from 2.7myn......there was a capitulation trade last week on the high volume day....might be slightly lower as of today
Time to crank up the stock buyback program.
Vegas Options - Yes and YES. But, if the price exceeds the conversion per share equivalent prior to the bond issue maturity date (June 2027), buying the bond provides more value to the company. JMHO
Gamco, If the company has to wait until then, doesn't it make more sense for them to buy 2M shares back now at this price?
Vegas Options - just wait until the price of the common stock exceeds the 130% conversion cap regarding the bond issue.
Best luck to all and I hope everyone has a safe Memorial Day weekend.
Gamco, tell me where I can buy them at par and I will.
Vegas Options - The bond holders at maturity get credit for the same dollar amount as common stock holders got paid in dividends. Example: a $1,000 bond received $35 interest annually plus credit for that years dividend paid at maturity. Conversion rate per $1,000 bond is stated to be 12.9041 shares, so bond holders receive credit or $18.06574 (12.9041 shares × $1.40 annual dividend). Assuming the dividend rate per year remains constant at $1.40, the annual return for a $1,000 bond would be $35 interest paid currently plus $18.07 paid at maturity or a dollar return equal to $53.07 annually.
Those bond holders also have the leverage of the sliding conversion rate which is capped at 130% of the initial stated conversion rate in the bond indenture. That leverage diminishes at the stock approaches $101. The bonds then should theoretically trade at par.
All just my humble opinion.
Gamco, No. The bonds decay equal to the dividend rate. At maturity they will convert at $70 and are hedged up to $125. Also you can not buy the bonds at the current stock price as they trade at a sizable premium. If you think about it, what would you pay for a 4 year option at $70 that pays you 3 1/2% per year... It is much cheaper to just buy the stock.
Glen you could buy the converts.back...and sell off the hedges...lots of flexibility on things that can be done within the cap structure...when your flush with cash
Vegas options - after 130% of the $77.49 conversation price (approximately $101) won't the convertible bonds be cheaper than the price per share above $101?
Gamco, why would you want to buy the convertible bonds when they are hedged to$125 ?
I wish that I could answer of the questions that you have presented. But I can't.
One of my questions is can funds authorized of the stock buyback also be used to buy some of the convertible bonds?
How long will IDCC continue the stock buyback? Will IDCC redeem the notes on or after June 5, 2025? What will the stock price be on or after June 5, 2025? Stock price of $100.737 is 130% of the $77.49 conversion strike price. Is it reasonable to assume that IDCC has a specific number of shares targeted for buyback in anticipation of a redemption on or after June 5, 2025? Is reasonable to assume IDCC has some type of end point/game for the stock buyback? If so, what is it?
More questions than answers. Good luck to all longs...let the upward rise continue!
InterDigital Announces Upsize and Pricing of Private Offering of $400 Million of 3.50% Senior Convertible Notes
imm....on a technical basis....this is what my favorite type of chart says
https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/pnf.php?c=IDCC,PWTADANRBO[PA][D][F1!3!!!2!20]
point of interest...5 o'clock charlie made an appearance last evening....he put in an 85.87 print at 4.51pm....well beyond the high of the day....you gotta believe!!!!
InterDigital’s Energy Aware Media Team Awarded Best Full-Length Paper at the ACM Mile High Video Conference 2023
MAY 19, 2023 / POSTED BY: INTERDIGITAL COMMS
Congratulations to InterDigital’s Energy Aware Media team for being awarded Best Full-Length Paper at the ACM Mile High Video Conference 2023!
The paper “Energy-Aware Images: Quality of Experience vs Energy Reduction” was produced by members of InterDigital’s Video Lab, including Olivier Le Meur, Claire-Hélène Demarty, Erik Reinhard, Franck Aumont, and Laurent Blonde, and together they propose a new framework for analyzing and processing video frames that allow modern screens to use less energy when displaying these frames.
In their analysis, the InterDigital team considers two use cases: one whereby the energy is reduced as much as possible under the constraint that visual quality is maintained, and another where the highest visual quality is sought under the constraint of a fixed reduction of energy use.
You can learn more and read the complete paper here.
For more information about InterDigital’s research and contributions to energy aware media, please click here.
@InterDigitalCom, leader in #wireless evolution from #5G to 6G, will contribute to the identification of requirements that will help to define an overall reference architecture design of PREDICT-6G.
May 15, 2023
https://predict-6g.eu/team/
IMM, there is only one rule that always applies, "No matter what you do, you will regret..."
What's this board's consensus as to the share price one week from today?
I sold some covered 75 calls when the share price had a 60 handle.
Buy to cover, or let the shares go and repurchase next week?
History tells me that shares will be cheaper net week.
IDCC may have the technology Meta needs for its MSVP ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) chip.
Interdigital Deep Video and M2M Compression
Looks like about 150K shares will change hands today through options on close.
IMO if IDCC has what Meta wants, the stock could worth over 200..
High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Is what IDCC is working on and just signed Alps Alpine to license its HVEC technology. Could be a very big license win if IDCC’s HVEC software technology is included in Meta’s MSVP chip.
I don't pretend to know if the following paragraph describes what InterDigital has been working on with the video standards community but.......
________________
"One of the new computer chips, the Meta Scalable Video Processor, or MSVP, is used to process and transmit video to users while cutting down on energy requirements. Bjorlin said "there was nothing commercially available" that could handle the task of processing and delivering 4 billion videos a day as efficiently as Meta wanted."
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/18/meta-pulls-the-curtain-back-on-its-ai-chips-for-the-first-time.html
Oh boy ...huge volume....right at California margin time...my guess is shorts have been decreased by incarceration....it's the old double edge sword...less of their buying power...but we're on a big roll...shorts are still 20 yards offsides....and it ain't gonna get easier for them....tally ho ...young gentleman!!!
IMO a $1 increase in the annual dividend is not out of the question in the next 12 months especially when/if the share price nears $90-$100. Mgmt has commented during several prior conference calls how they are pleased with the greater than 2% dividend payout to current share price. To be consistent, mgmt will need to maintain that greater than 2% dividend payout with the increasing share price going forward. In addition if mgmt wants this stock to be a potential dividend play, current US Treasury 4-week T-bills are now paying over 5%. The reduced share count upon completion of the current stock buyback while allocating the same amount of cash/budget for dividend payout as before the start of the stock buyback will make that additional $1 in dividend easier to achieve. IMO, the recent projected revenues until 2027 and thereafter are for Lenovo and Samsung only. It does not account for other outstanding future licensees like OPPO paying up and taking a license along with increasing revenues from video (Alps Alpine Co), IOT, Avanci (Samsung just signed with Avanci), and any revenues from other licensed technologies.
Followers
|
880
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
433140
|
Created
|
01/05/02
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
The principle objective of the iHub message boards is to maintain a high signal-to-noise ratio while encouraging the exchange of all points of view. Moderators are an important part of making our message boards beneficial to all participants and readers. Moderating a stock-specific board, particularly those which are controversial due to many divergent perspectives or newsworthy events, can be a challenging and time consuming role. The time and effort expended by our Members who volunteer their time to fulfill this valuable role is greatly appreciated and our Moderators should be treated with the respect they deserve for donating their time and efforts to the collective benefit of our community. Company-specific boards are the lifeblood of iHub. The Moderators' role is simple to define for company-specific boards:
To promote the civil exchange of on-topic dialog that complies with the Investors Hub Terms of Service. |
It is no accident that neither the above definition nor the Terms of Service makes mention of investment sentiment, shareholder interests, or considerations such as "the good of the company." That is because the TOS are blind to investment sentiment. In order to be a successful Moderator and conduct a board within the scope of iHub's TOS, it is critical that Moderators distinguish their role and privileges as Moderator from their role and privileges as a posting Member. That is often easier said than done, particularly on active boards with both the typical and atypical controversy.
If a post does not fit into any of these categories the post must not be removed.
Some posts fall into a "gray" area and are borderline depending upon the way they are read. As inclusion is favored over exclusion, please err or the side of not removing posts if they are not clear violations. Please use the "Report TOS Violation" button at the bottom of the post with your comments if the post is not egregious in nature and Site Admins will review the message.
Bottom line: Please use your best judgment in removing posts based on the above guidelines and let us know if you have any questions or need any help. And keep in mind that post removal and non-removal have to be given the same emphasis. It is not permissible, for example, to remove a post that calls someone a "pumper" while not also removing a post that calls someone a "basher". Investor sentiment, including your own, can NOT be part of the removal/non-removal decision.
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |