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.
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.
Gee. I'm realllllllly sorry Miller.
I was just reacting to your post to SJR, when you told him:
"We only have control over our actions, not the actions of others."
I thought your response to Ima was a perfect example of your definition of control, and your contributions to integrity on the Internet.
Ams.
Compared to Miller, you're a sweetpea.
SJR.
"If this post is deleted or if other posts that are deleted without sufficient cause, I will not post here any more, and thus not provide legal input or PACER updates."
For some reason, you believe you are the only one who can give legal input, and the only one with a PACER membership.
Much of what you say is "the price is going to go down", followed by five or ten "I told you so's".
If that's how you maintain the integrity of this board, we can do without it.
Try this on for size:
The risk for the "Time is money" sharpies on WallStreet has now become a triple:
1. The judge may not rule for several weeks.
2. Nokia might appeal, offsetting a ruling in IDCC's favor.
3. Nokia has 30 days after the ruling to decide on an appeal.
That puts us into the first quarter of 2006, unless Nokia decides to throw in the towel.
D.R.
Something's still rotten in Korea.
Why would the entire country go exclusively for CDMA without some healthy concessions by QCOM?
On the other hand, a royalty-free Korea does not seem realistic.
No need to respond. But could the truth lie somehwere in between?
Thanks Dave.
Let's hope Judge Pauley's clerks are on the ball, and come with a ruling soon.
In the meantime, Delaware is still AWOL. But some action by the end of the year would prove that they are still open for business.
Gman.
We leave PACER to Dave Davis.
L2V.
After talking with three people who attended the hearing, it seems that Friday's exercise amounted to "public castration" of Nokia's legal team, as well as our friend, Jorma.
(Paraphrased)
THE ENTREE: "IDCC was asking $500 million, and was awarded $232 million. The ICC cut the baby in half, so you won, as well as IDCC!"
THE SETUP: "Can you cite a precedent or law which would permit me to vacate the ICC award?" (Asked several times, with no substantive response by Nokia).
THE CLINCHER: "So what are you doing in my courtroom?"
When a federal judge makes those kinds of comments, how could he possibly rule:
"The ICC award is hereby vacated. Decision for defendant."
D.D./Mschere:
This has probably been discussed before but, if QCOM is suing Nokia for infringement of GSM patents, does QCOM's license with Nokia ONLY pertain to CDMA, or does it also include WCDMA?
Talking about paying, when will someone get around to adding up Nokia's bill?
By my count, they should owe close to $400 million, including lost discounts, additional interest, and statutory interest.
If the judge rules in IDCC's favor, whose calculator will the parties use when they push the total button?
BTW, Nokia's attorneys need to do a little brushing up on the Ericy case.
"He went on to say the Ericcson paid about 7 or 12 million for handsets sold in 2003."
If they paid more attention to this board, they would know that Ericy's handset division was JV'd with Sony in 2001.
I wouldn't accuse him of trying to mislead the court. But he's obviously misleading his client when he makes $400/$500 an hour, and he and four other attorneys can't get closer than two years with the facts.
GAB.
Thanks from the bottom of my pocketbook to both you and MTS.
However, I think you erred when you didn't let your wife scratch the Nokia attorney's eyes out.
Jim.
LOL.
Either that, or "These people are from the message boards that provide you with evidence for the Delaware case."
Guido and MTS could be famous, come next week!
Bob.
This little excursion only cost Nokia about $25 million, including $20 million in lost discount.
The next level won't involve discount, but could bring a sanction or two.
How many times can a guy pay you to hang him from the same tree?
Piano.
Don't think we'll be seeing him anytime soon.
Hobe.
I like the part where Nokia, after more than one request by the judge, could not give a legal reason why the award should be vacated or modified.
If Nokia appeals, that should go over well at the next level.
Dave.
Interesting comment about the investment community.
Do they want this decision in private?
We certainly don't want to embarrass Jorma in front of Wall Streeters. But it's a little strange that Nokia is finally concerned about what Wall Street might think about a second loss on the ICC ruling.
If they lose this round, will that stop them from going to the next level, and losing for a third time?
These guys are getting more than a little disgusting!
Mschere.
Our guy is a state auditor, and should have good notes.
Here's a bit more:
Although I only talked to him for a few minutes, I got the distinct impression that things went poorly for Nokia, which could mean they went very well for us. Kinda like the Washington appeal, where one judge debated with Nokia.
As the lawyers surmised, the judge will reserve his decision till later, but gave no indication when.
The feeling I got is he could have ruled for IDCC with no problem.
The big shocker was the performance of Nokia's attorneys. They said nothing of substance. Yak, yak, yak. Boring! Abstract. Off point. He said the court reporter had trouble keeping up with the mouthy Nokia lawyer.
Gives me more confidence that Delaware might see more of the same, given their strong "reliance" on the IHUB post.
At any rate, it looks like we won this round.
Although Nokia seems dead-set on carrying this as far as possible, their lawyers might convince them otherwise, if my impression is correct.
2:30.
It's half of a fruitcake.
Revlis.
That last paragraph was hum-dinger!
"If a party fails to identify governing law to an arbitrator, “we will infer knowledge and intentionality on the part of the arbitrator only if we find an error that is so obvious that it would be instantly perceived as such by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator.” Duferco, 333 F.3d at 390. Thus, counsel forego their obligation to educate arbitral panels as to governing
legal principles at their great peril. A motion to vacate an arbitral award because of manifest disregard of the law requires a showing that an arbitrator disregarded “a governing legal principle [that] is well-defined, explicit, and clearly applicable to the case, and [that] the arbitrator ignored it after it was brought to the arbitrator’s attention in a way that assures that the arbitrator knew its
controlling nature.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nokia's boyz would have to be fuit-cakes to believe that a majority of 16 "reviewers" missed it.
MTS.
Guido is just leaving for the train.
Bring back the bacon!
Bobbie.
Don't give us those "poor boy" excuses.
Get back to NY tomorrow, and keep MTS and Guido company.
This is serious business.
Jim.
Yes, they'll call.
MTS also has a bunch of phone numbers.
If it doesn't last long, we may know something well before 4 PM.
Jim.
Two will be going from Yahoo.
I advised MTS of their names, so they can form a cheering section.
Mschere.
Even though some of these "bombs" won't go off until 2006 and 2008, I'm finding this rather hard to believe.
QCOM made its deals 15 years ago, and those decisions are now coming home to roost. One wonders what they were thinking. Were they in the same position as IDCC in 1999, and wanted to get off the ground?
Samsung would seem to gain little is revealing contract provisions, except to raise the hair on the back of Jorma's neck!
Is one any worse than the other, when it comes to hating royalties?
MTS.
Doesn't the majority of QCOM's revenue come from CDMA in Korea?
Although royalties for domestic sales will start expiring next year, the big hit comes in 2008, when royalties expire on exports.
Mschere.
Agree 100%.
The old trick: "I won't give you a copy, but I'll let you see the document."
They obviously knew the Korean Times would make the information public.
Why could Samsung's motive be?
"the size of Qualcomm’s royalties has snowballed, since they are based on total handset prices, including built-in cameras and MP3 players that the U.S. firm has nothing to do with."
Mschere.
That is HUGE, HUGE news!
Big fireworks in 2006!
Amr.
Obviously, I haven't the slightest.
I'm still shocked that the trial will be over so soon, given our past experience with lawsuits.
And I have little confidence that the U.K. patent court really knows what it's doing, when it comes to validity and invalidity.
Here's the latest from Lindsay, at Court Services in the U.K.
(She apologized for the late answer. she was off ill):
"The trial will continue on the 11th January for the end of evidence. This will last for 2 days.
Closing speeches are the 30th January."
MTS.
Reminder. No less than 16 votes were involved in the arbitration decision, which found in favor of IDCC:
1. A seven member legal team in Paris, which followed the case from start to finish.
2. A six member ICC court.
3. Three arbitrators in the U.S.
When you go to court on Friday, please say hello to Jorma, and remind him that arithmetic is no different in this country, than in Finland.
They correctly predicted the last two licensees.
MTS.
Two Yahoo posters will be attending.
Did you get my email?
I still haven't received a reply from Lindsay in U.K. court services.
She may be a little tired of answering my emails.
MTS.
Sent an email to the clerk.
Hope to get an answer by tomorrow.
Bulldozer.
Loop had an illness in the family, and will be out of pocket for a few days.
L2V.
Wouldn't that take the cake?
Nokia losing at the ICC, and losing again in NY!
Hell. I wouldn't even care if they appealed.
Even the Brits might take notice.
L2V.
Actually, I was being a little picky in giving the other two alternatives.
A modification is highly unlikely, and if the judge reverses the award, we will storm the courthouse. LOL.