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.
Gman.
Sammy might capitulate by September 30, if IDCC dangles the right carrot, or the right sledge hammer.
Mr. Bill used the word "licensees", and two would obviously be more difficult that one.
But IDCC could get a twofer if Ericy and SNE signed.
This might cause a little heartburn for Oil Ollila, since they are apparently both triggers for 3G.
Aha!
Another chance to repeat this great post by Clarence!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Judge Rader - Your contract with IDCC just substitutes NOK for ERICY.
NOK - No it doesn’t.
Judge Rader - Yes it does.
NOK - No it doesn’t.
Judge Rader - Yes it does.
NOK - OK, it does.
(Poetic license obviously taken here).
Judge Rader - Then why didn’t you intervene earlier?
NOK - NOK did not have the same interest in 1999. When IDCC got the Orders vacated, that had an effect upon the contract (IDCC/NOK license).
Judge - Why should we help you when you could have intervened earlier?
NOK - We trusted IDCC.
Judge Rader - OK, they didn’t protect you; but they had no obligation to protect you.
SJ.
I only have one post left, but I had to ask the following:
If the parties submit final briefs by September 12, why does Nokia ask to be heard on September 19 on their motion to vacate?
So far as we know, the judge has set no schedule for hearings.
Do you think Nokia is pressing the judge, since he might decide against doing so?
Mschere.
If Nokia had not lost $42 million in discounts, I might agree.
But clearly, they're burning their bridges, no matter the cost.
Too bad. This little tidbit will be lost on Wall Street and Nokia shareholders, because no amount was mentioned by Merritt.
But IDCC finally brought the fight into the open, where others can judge Nokia's actions for themselves.
Ed.
"Call for back-up!" (In the UK). LOL.
Although we're a little biased, the Delaware action does not appear to one of Nokia's finest hours.
The judge may have asked for a prototype of the 2007 phone, which could account for the lack of action.
Ed.
Good catch.
But why would Nokia again do battle in the UK, when the Euro continent, Japan, China, etc., are far larger markets?
Two words:
NO TRIAL!
Just for good measure, IDCC just added another NY attorney by the name of Ron Shulman.
Dave.
I thought anyone could get maternity leave these days, whether male or female.
All I know is, he/she's a real sweetheart, and always gives prompt answers.
Must be a woman. LOL.
Dan.
So far as I know, the latest email from Sam Stevens at the UK Courts Services Office still stands:
"The trial date was never May, it was a mistake on the website. It was originally July and then moved to October. Sorry if the website has caused you confusion."
Loop.
Would you have made the "we didn't get a signed copy until July 5" argument?
From Yahoo's Llobo:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They had no problem discussing it on July 4:
"We have received a decision but will give our view of it later," a Nokia spokeswoman said."
http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNewsArticle.jhtml?duid=mtfh33310_200 5-07-04_14-08-13_l04683729_newsml
And they didn't require much time on July 5th to decide to vacate:
Tue Jul 5, 2005 10:40 AM ET
NEW YORK, July 5 (Reuters) - Nokia, the world's biggest mobile phone maker, said on Tuesday it would consider moving to vacate or change the majority decision in its patent dispute with InterDigital Communications Corp.
Kid.
Yeah. I forgot that part.
Now we know why these guyz get $400-$500 an hour! LOL.
Jim.
I know of only one Phillips.
Even if we're wrong, I'll take the one we just signed.
Looks like they're a little more stable than HPON. LOL.
Sale.
My drift is simply this:
Nokia's boyz are throwing all the cow dung they can get their hands on, like a manuer spreader, hoping one or more globs stick.
If you've ever seen a spreader, you know you can end up with B.S. all over your face, if the wind's blowing in the wrong direction.
Rather than waiting for IDCC's response, we're assuming our guys just got off the turnip truck, and have no counter-arguments.
I, for one, believe we'll be pleasantly surprised when we see their response on August 29.
So. . . . . .
IDCC is not just about Nokia.
Would you call this a breakthrough when a monster Netherland's company reaches all the way to King of Prussia to upgrade its platform?
Thanks, Mr. Bill. Nineteen more to go.
Dodd.
I honestly can't believe these Nokia guyz!
"You gave IDCC a copy of the award four days before you gave it to us, you dirty ratz!"
Why would anyone bother to mention such a piddling event, unless they had nothing better to argue.
Sale.
I, for one, am throwing in the towel!
After reading Nokia's super-sized arguments, it's clear to me that F&J and IDCC's NY lawyers are nothing but dummies who got their degrees at KMart, while Nokia's boyz cannot be stopped!
1. The award arrived four days late, and IDCC refused to give them a copy! WOW. That ranks almost as high as introducing the post from IHUB as evidence of litigiousness.
2. They claim that SNE was not a named trigger, even though SNE didn't exist in 1999.
3. Another STRONG argument: SNE was not a successor/assign, according to NY law. WOWIE. How could our lawyers, the panel, a seven member legal team in Paris, and the ICC itself miss that one?
Clearly, we have no chance now.
We should not wait for IDCC's response on August 29th.
We should not wait for the CC tomorrow.
SNE did not exist in 1999.
Hook.
I would not be suspicious if the case involved someone like Proctor and Gamble.
But Nokia has shown its colors many times.
It would stoop to any level to win.
IDCC might be advised to look into the background of the dissenting panel member.
This guy was not just put there to vote. He seemed to be on a mission, which is coming out in some of Nokia's arguments.
Was he planted to find out everything possible about the panel's thinking on every minute point, so that Nokia would have a better chance of challenging the award, no matter what the basis?
Terps.
I still don't understand IDCC's motives in making the PLA public.
But this may be part of their next move.
Nokia played most of its cards today, so the PLA revelation may come on August 29, when IDCC is scheduled to respond.
Sale.
Do not be confused. Think of it like a final exam in Business Law, where one right answer can get you an "A". i.e., if one dollup of dung sticks, they think they'll win:
For example, I could understand if they simply gave a basis for "no trigger". However, "exceeded their authority in REWRITING the major competitors clause", is a bit insulting.
Likewise for "exeeded their authority in REWRITING the rate setting clause."
"impermissibly punished Nokia" for exercising its right to arbitration, seems to imply that the panel was openly critical of Nokia's demand for arbitration.
"exceeded their authority by REMOVING the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and the Most Favored Licensee clause from the PLA." is also hard to fathom, without seeing the entire argument.
We'll have to wait till the judge grades their paper.
From IDCC's 8K:
"On July 13, 2005, the U.S. District Judge presiding over the confirmation proceeding initiated by InterDigital Communications Corporation and InterDigital Technology Corporation (collectively "InterDigital") . . . .entered a scheduling order ("Order") in the proceeding.
The Order was entered pursuant to a joint stipulation of the parties.
Under the Order, any opposition by Nokia to InterDigital's petition for an order confirming the arbitration award AND ANY PETITION AND MOTION by Nokia TO VACATE the arbitration award MUST BE FILED AND SERVED ON INTERDIGITAL BY AUGUST 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nokia obviously wouldn't be foolish enough to ignore the order, but their "motion" to vacate will not be made until September 19.
More new "rules" from ViperLand.
The parties agreed, and the court ordered that final briefs were to be filed by September 12.
Now Nokia wants until September 19.
L2V.
The timing of Jorma's expiration is certainly suspect.
1. Nokia was starting to move in the right direction, except for the U.S. market.
2. So why did they suddenly choose an executive who did poorly in the U.S., where they are probably losing money, with 13% share?
Was this a quick move, because something had to give, and give fast? i.e.,
a. Did Nokia's finance staff raise a red flag at the prospect of blowing another $90-$100 million on lost discounts and interest, not to mention the possibility of punitive damages?
b. Did the public relations department balk at Jorma's seeming recommendation to give "The Finger" to the highly respected ICC?
c. Did Nokia IHUB observers report that IDCC shareholders were writing to Eliot, and Bush's new IPR czar?
Truth is stranger than friction.
For those who may be interested, the ICC does not normally intervene with friend-of-the-court actions, according to the NY office.
The reason: This would mean getting involved in lawsuits all of the world, which they are not prepared to do.
The ICC rep, however, did say, in rare cases, they will write a letter to the head of the losing company, if they believe that top officials have not been advised of the ruling.
Pekka is clearly no wallflower. He takes his first shot at his former boss, the "Follower":
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From Reuter's release:
"Kallasvuo said he was the man to lead Nokia and meet its challenges.
"I am sure I do have the fire," he told a briefing.
"Nokia needs to lead the changes in our industry, not to follow."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But, he may not like Americans, who buy about one Nokia phone out of every 8 purchased:
From an AP release:
Poul Jessen of Danske Securities told Dow Jones Newswires that the mobile phone division has improved under Kallasvuo.
However, he called Kallasvuo "not successful" when heading U.S. operations in 1997-1998.
"The U.S. has been Nokia's weak spot for some time," Jessen said.
Hobe.
The anticipation of filings, and all this noise concerning the Pekkas could make for an interesting day or two.
But, at the moment, I'm inclined to put my head under a pillow.
Jim.
Are you going to call the court?
Of Pekkas and Snakes:
Jorma is 54 today, and will retire next year at 55.
Pekka is 52 today, and will take over next year at 53.
As the photographer asked, "Is something's wrong with this picture?"
One Pekka will resign, and another Pekka will move up:
From the Yahoo NOK board:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
NOKIA PRESS RELEASE August 1, 2005
Nokia moves forward with management succession plan
- Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo appointed President and COO of Nokia Corporation as of October 1, 2005, and President and CEO effective June 1, 2006
- Jorma Ollila continues as Chairman and CEO until June 1, 2006, and it is proposed he continue as Non-Executive Chairman from that date
- Pekka Ala-Pietilä resigns from Nokia on February 1, 2006
Espoo, Finland - Nokia continues the renewal of its leadership while maintaining continuity in its Group Executive Board.
The Board of Directors has appointed Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo, 52, President and Chief Operating Officer effective October 1, 2005, and President and Chief Executive Officer from June 1, 2006. Mr. Kallasvuo joined Nokia in 1980 and currently heads the Mobile Phones business group. Prior to this he worked as the company's Chief Financial Officer.
The Corporate Governance and Nomination Committee of the Board of Directors will propose to the next annual general meeting that Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jorma Ollila, 54, continues after June 1, 2006 as Non-Executive Chairman. The Committee has received Mr. Ollila's confirmation that he is available for this position.
Nokia's current President, Pekka Ala-Pietilä, will resign to pursue personal interests. He will take on the role of Executive Advisor as of October 1 and leave Nokia on February 1, 2006.
Paul Collins, Vice Chairman of the Nokia Board, says: "The Nokia Board has had in place a succession process in anticipation of Jorma Ollila's retirement with the objective of maintaining vitality, adapting to a rapidly evolving industry, and ensuring continuity. The Board is convinced that Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo, with his strong industry credentials and over 20 years of experience at Nokia, will provide the required leadership for the Company in the future."
"Jorma Ollila, our CEO for over 13 years and Chairman for over 6 years, has built the modern Nokia that we know today. Therefore we are pleased that Mr. Ollila has agreed to remain as the Chairman of the Board. This will provide for an orderly transition while giving the Company access to his understanding of our business, our industry and its challenges and opportunities."
"The Board also expresses its sincere thanks to Pekka Ala-Pietilä for his years of commitment, contribution, and leadership, as he has decided to leave Nokia and take on new challenges."
Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo says: "It is a privilege to be offered this position. Nokia is a dynamic company in a fast-changing and fluid environment. I look forward to working together with our team to help Nokia shape the future of mobile communications at a pivotal time for the industry. Together we will continue to create great products and solutions that will delight our customers."
Jorma Ollila says: "I strongly believe in renewal at all levels of the company. I have been in charge of operations at Nokia since 1992, and these have been exciting, unforgettable years. I remain strongly committed to Nokia and am keen to continue contributing to Nokia's strategy and renewal, helping it to build on its position as the undisputed leader in mobility."
Pekka Ala-Pietilä says: "I have spent over two great decades at Nokia, during which the company and the industry have undergone seismic changes. It has been fascinating to work with such committed people and build a global leader, but I now feel that it is a time for a change. I leave a team that I know retains all the ingredients for future success."
Nokia will organize a press conference and live Webcast at 3 p.m. EET (2:00 p.m. CET) at its head office, Keilalahdentie 4, Espoo, Finland. The webcast will be made available at: www.nokia.com/press/pressconference01082005
Jorma is being kicked upstairs on October lst:
UPDATE 1-Nokia says Kallasvuo to succeed Ollila
Mon Aug 1, 2005 06:29 AM ET
HELSINKI, Aug 1 (Reuters) -
The world's top mobile handset maker Nokia announced on Monday Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo would take over as chief executive of the company next year when Jorma Ollila steps down from the position.
Kallasvuo, 52, will become president and chief operating officer of the company from Oct. 1 and take over as chief executive from June 1 from Ollila, who will move to the position of non-executive chairman.
The company said in a statement Jorma Ollila would continue as chairman and chief executive before becoming chairman, to ensure an orderly transition.
Kallasvuo currently heads Nokia's Mobile Phones business group and was formerly chief financial officer.
"I would think the overall impression of Kallasvuo is positive, he has had various responsibilities in the last few years -- sort of preparing him for this position," said Karri Rinta, analyst at Nordea.
Ollila, 54, joined Nokia in 1985 and took over as the head of the company in 1992.
"I remain strongly committed to Nokia and am keen to continue contributing to Nokia's strategy and renewal, helping it to build on its position as the undisputed leader in mobility," Ollila said in the statement.
Company President Pekka Ala-Pietila would resign from the company with effect from Feb. 1, 2006.
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
Thanks Corp.
I guess that also means IDCC would have to sue to get an infringement ruling.
Although payment terms vary by industry, "30 days" is one that is often used.
However, if Nokia files to challenge, they will set a process in motion that will take us into the middle of September (75 days).
If, after that, the judge allows oral arguments, and gives himself ample time for a decision. . . . . . . . . . .
Hell. I don't even want to finish this. Except to say, if they file, we can forget about Nokia paying by the deadline.
I'm not with you, Mschere.
What would IDCC hope to gain by such a filing, that we don't already know?
With 13% of the U.S. market, I wonder how many phones those 6,600 employees sell, per employee.
If they file, chances are Nokia's lawyers will continue taking the "juvenile" route:
1. We filed suit in Delaware because we were scared silly that IDCC would sue us, and we only have $15 billion in the bank to defend ourselves.
2. An IHUB poster agreed that IDCC was a litigious company. We don't know his name or his agenda. But he wouldn't have said it, if it wasn't true.
3. IDCC lawyers obviously don't know much about ethics. When the ICC makes an award, the parties are supposed to sit down and talk about it. (We haven't yet convinced the ICC to adopt this rule, but that doesn't make it wrong!).
4. We object to IDCC's immediate filing to enforce the award. Just because we told them we were going to fight, that's no reason to file another legal action.
5. We applaud the ICC's decision to cut the award in half. It's the other half we don't like.
6. The ICC places little weight on the fact that 33% of panel members dissented. Therefore, we want to try for
"two-out-of-three", and will be demanding two more arbitrations.
7. We thought we were litigating in New York. But IDCC is now importing foreigners from California. Jeeze. We don't even know if they're illegal immigrants. Moreover, some of these Pro Hacs specialize in anti-trust, fraud, conspiracy, and similar violations. What do you think we are. . . . . . crooks?
Charlie.
I don't yet know where I'm going with this, but I thought I'd start with a post from Yahoo:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
by: VSerf (39/M/NY)
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Buy 07/29/05 10:50 pm
Msg: 234694 of 234695
Here is the response I got from a letter I sent to NYS AG office, in reference to the Nokia cartel and price fixing.
The Attorney General has asked me to thank you for your recent letter and for making us aware of your concerns about Nokia Corporation.
Your correspondence has been forwarded to the appropriate members of our staff. I am sure that your comments will be of interest to them. We will keep them in mind during any discussions we may have on this issue.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to write and for sharing your concerns.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We all know Spitzer's reputation for catching big fish. And he has openly admitted that his highly unusal success has often started with a "tip". But unless he has the right bait, VSerf's correspondence will probably go unheeded.
Vserf's frustration, however, is a reminder that this is not a protracted battle of titans, involving the likes of General Electric or Proctor and Gamble.
And the difference is not that Nokia is a Finnish company, or that Ollila is a tough guy, playing loose with his company's piggy bank. And it has little to do with shysters.
IP CASES ARE TRULY DIFFERENT! And Spitzer's staff may not see that.
IDCC is selling patents, not light bulbs or toilet tissue. And each patent is finite, with some running out next year.
So the issue is time! And running-out the clock is Nokia's game.
I'm sure Spitzer wouild delight in nailing a bully. And, unlike congress, he speaks the same language as the lawyers on this board.
I had little appetite for writing to congress. But I'm intrigued by the prospect of sending a comprehensive letter to Spitzer, with a copy to select politicians.
Although his motives may currently be political, his name still inspires fear in anyone who receives a copy.
Bottom line: If Nokia files to delay, vacate or change the award on Monday, I think we should discuss a Spitzer approach,
while there is still time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
You folks might do well to stand back and look at what you're posting.
Of course, Jim might set aside a separate time when you could all bash one another.
I, for one, have had a belly full!