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.
Summary provided by Co-pilot:
Certainly! Here’s a summary of the court order:
Title: Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Order on Motion to Strike
Context: The court considered plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss. As a general rule, an amended pleading supersedes the original and renders it legally ineffective. Defendants Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Motorola Mobility filed amended answer and counterclaims after plaintiffs’ motion. The court denied the motion as moot. However, if plaintiffs file a renewed motion to dismiss regarding count III of amended counterclaims, the parties may rely on their prior briefs instead of refiling them1.
Summary provided by Gemini (previously Google Assistant):
The court order denies the plaintiff's motion to dismiss because the defendants filed amended pleadings that render the motion irrelevant. The order also allows the plaintiff to re-file a motion to dismiss a specific count in the amended counterclaims, with simplified briefing procedures.
x993231 - Thank you for your response. EOM
Is there any connection here to Lightwave Logic?
https://scitechdaily.com/breaking-moores-law-lightmatter-accelerates-progress-toward-light-speed-computing/
jealmc79 - Is it fair to say that after the current bond redemption at the end of March and the remainder of the previous bond issue maturing at the beginning of June, that InterDigital would have zero debt on the books? Unless they entered into some type of new indebtedness. TIA
U-Blox should sign a license and terminate their litigation soon. JMHO
Interdigital to Speak at the 36th Annual Roth Conference
Source: GlobeNewswire Inc.
InterDigital, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC), a mobile, video and AI technology research and development company, today announced that the company will be participating in a fireside chat at the 36th Annual Roth Conference on Monday, March 18th, 2024, at 6:00 PM ET.
The event will be webcast live, and an archived replay of the presentation will be available following the conference at the Investors page of the InterDigital website at www.interdigital.com. Register to attend the live webcast here.
About InterDigital®
InterDigital is a global research and development company focused primarily on wireless, video, artificial intelligence (“AI”), and related technologies. We design and develop foundational technologies that enable connected, immersive experiences in a broad range of communications and entertainment products and services. We license our innovations worldwide to companies providing such products and services, including makers of wireless communications devices, consumer electronics, IoT devices, cars and other motor vehicles, and providers of cloud-based services such as video streaming. As a leader in wireless technology, our engineers have designed and developed a wide range of innovations that are used in wireless products and networks, from the earliest digital cellular systems to 5G and today’s most advanced Wi-Fi technologies. We are also a leader in video processing and video encoding/decoding technology, with a significant AI research effort that intersects with both wireless and video technologies. Founded in 1972, InterDigital is listed on Nasdaq.
InterDigital is a registered trademark of InterDigital, Inc.
For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com.
InterDigital Contact:
investor.relations@interdigital.com
+1 (302) 300-1857
Israt - It appears that you are correct about Stockcharts eliminating their free offer of point & figure charts. I enjoyed that feature and used it for several decades. It looks like you now need to be a paid member to have access. If anyone finds a free version, please post a link. Thanks in advance.
Another charting approach that I have enjoyed in the past was "Stock Seasonality". The brokerage firm of Scott and Stringfellow used to offer it, but I no longer have access. If anyone finds a link to a free version of it, please post.
This is dated November 7, 2023 but I don't remember seeing it posted.
..............
Exclusive: InterDigital launches first China office with Dolby hire
Sukanya Sarkar
November 07, 2023
The US technology firm has set up shop in Beijing and appointed a former senior counsel at Dolby to lead its licensing operations in China
https://www.managingip.com/article/2cf6reg61xbm7emjdgjk0/exclusive-interdigital-launches-first-china-office-with-dolby-hire
Most of the call volume is farther out of the money than usual for IDCC. Just my observation.
Teecee56 - Check out the March calls open contracts and strike prices.
On February 23, 2024, the Delhi High Court ordered Oppo and its affiliates to deposit a hefty security amount with its registrar general within three months, which represents the pending royalties owed to InterDigital. The exact amount is confidential, but it is based on the latest bank guarantee submitted by Oppo in a German court in a similar case.
The court also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on Oppo and its affiliates for their conduct and delays in the matter.
The court noted that InterDigital had made a prima facie case of infringement and that Oppo had not shown any willingness to negotiate a FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) license with InterDigital.
The court also formed a confidentiality club for the exchange of sensitive information between the parties.
The order came days before the UK High Court was scheduled to determine a global FRAND rate for InterDigital’s SEPs in another case filed by the US company against Oppo and other defendants.
This is one of the first cases in India where a SEP owner has obtained a favorable interim order against an alleged infringer. It shows that India is an attractive jurisdiction for SEP owners to enforce their rights and seek royalties from smartphone manufacturers. 1
InterDigital Honors Wireless and Video Innovation Leaders Michael Starsinic and Fabrice Le Léannec as Inventors of the Year
Source: GlobeNewswire Inc.
InterDigital, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC), a mobile, video and AI technology research and development company, annually honors the company’s outstanding inventors for the ingenuity and impact of their innovation. This year, InterDigital has named Michael Starsinic and Fabrice Le Léannec both as the 2024 Inventor of the Year award winners, recognizing their expertise and innovative contributions in wireless communication and video delivery protocols that empower the connected experiences we enjoy today, and can expect for the future.
Inventors remain the cornerstone of InterDigital’s innovation. This year’s Inventor of the Year award celebrates two inventors whose research contributions have influenced the wireless and video standards that make seamless communication of data and content across a variety of device types, services, and network capabilities possible. Michael’s patented innovations in IoT and beyond 5G network capabilities and Fabrice’s patented contributions to the evolution of state-of-the-art video codecs both unlock new efficiencies in network communications and content delivery to support increasingly exciting and data-rich experiences.
“At InterDigital, our innovation impact is earned and maintained by world-class inventors like Fabrice and Michael who push the boundaries of what is possible in our communications,” said Liren Chen, President and CEO at InterDigital. “While each are unique, this year’s Inventor of the Year award winners are both recognized for their commitment to technology advancement, their collaborative nature, and the impact of their innovations in delivering new capabilities and efficiencies across our networks, devices, and services.”
InterDigital 2024 Inventor of the Year Award Winners
Michael Starsinic
Since joining InterDigital in 2000, Michael Starsinic has led research initiatives, contributed to standards, and developed a strong portfolio of innovation advancing network architecture and communications protocols for IoT and 5G-enabled devices. Throughout his extensive career, Michael has shaped the standards driving efficiency in IoT communications and fostered improvements to network protocols to support new services like extended reality and haptic-enhanced communications.
As an inventor, Michael is inspired by the long tail of innovation and the challenge of consistently developing new contributions to improve the status quo. Michael’s patented inventions have largely addressed improvements to the protocols that make device and application communication with the network efficient. In addition to his significant contributions to Convida, a joint venture between InterDigital and Sony dedicated to IoT research and innovation, Michael’s early research in service capability exposure, or the ways different IoT applications interact with the core network, has evolved to support 5G network communication with more complex and data intense applications, like augmented and extended reality (AR/XR).
Michael is well respected throughout industry and standards circles, and he cites his collaborations with colleagues as fuel for his innovation. Whether through contributions to the oneM2M and 3GPP standards ecosystems or forward-looking research that enhances network support for next-gen devices and applications, Michael is an esteemed inventor influencing system architectures and communications protocols that unlock incredible new capabilities for networks and consumers alike.
Fabrice Le Léannec
Fabrice Le Léannec is a Brittany-based Senior Principal Researcher shaping next generation video codecs through his significant contributions to the High Efficiency Video Codec (HEVC) and Versatile Video Codec (VVC) and their specifications in the MPEG standards. In 2013, Fabrice joined Technicolor Research and Innovation (which was later acquired by InterDigital in 2019), but he has been researching and contributing to the advancement of video compression and codecs for nearly thirty years. At InterDigital, Fabrice has dedicated his research to developing new algorithms and improvements to achieve greater efficiencies from state-of-the-art video compression.
With a strong competitive spirit and a drive to discover new ideas and approaches to make video compression even more efficient, Fabrice has patented innovations that unlock new avenues to reduce the bitrate of compressed video while maintaining equivalent video quality. As our communications and experiences become increasingly rich with video data, Fabrice’s expertise and contributions to the HEVC, VVC, and future-looking video codecs helps make seamless streamed content delivery across devices possible.
Looking ahead, Fabrice is intrigued by the application of AI within video compression and the ways it will influence new designs of the codec and drive greater gains over state-of-the-art solutions. Today, he remains a critical contributor and collaborator within InterDigital’s Video Lab with research that is consistently recognized by the MPEG and JVET standards communities.
About InterDigital®
InterDigital is a global research and development company focused primarily on wireless, video, artificial intelligence (“AI”), and related technologies. We design and develop foundational technologies that enable connected, immersive experiences in a broad range of communications and entertainment products and services. We license our innovations worldwide to companies providing such products and services, including makers of wireless communications devices, consumer electronics, IoT devices, cars and other motor vehicles, and providers of cloud-based services such as video streaming. As a leader in wireless technology, our engineers have designed and developed a wide range of innovations that are used in wireless products and networks, from the earliest digital cellular systems to 5G and today’s most advanced Wi-Fi technologies. We are also a leader in video processing and video encoding/decoding technology, with a significant AI research effort that intersects with both wireless and video technologies. Founded in 1972, InterDigital is listed on Nasdaq.
InterDigital is a registered trademark of InterDigital, Inc.
For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com.
InterDigital?Contact: Roya Stephens Email:?Roya.Stephens @True_wesT
Keysight and InterDigital to Demonstrate AI in 6G Systems at Mobile World Congress 2024
Source: Business Wire
Demonstration of training and operation of artificial intelligence signal processing models inside a 6G physical layer
AI models are trained with simulated and real-world data
Operation of models are validated in an over-the-air system
Keysight Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: KEYS) has collaborated with mobile, video and AI technology research and development company InterDigital Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC) to show how Artificial Intelligence (AI) channel estimators can be trained, integrated into a physical layer, and evaluated with an over-the-air demonstration at Mobile World Congress Barcelona 2024 (MWC24). Presented at Keysight's booth, Hall 5 Stand 5E12, the demonstration will feature a 144 GHz communications link that uses AI models for channel estimation developed by InterDigital and Keysight.
As AI technology matures, it is being integrated into wireless communications systems and will be a foundational technology for 6G. One of the applications of AI in wireless is channel estimation. When the channel estimation block is replaced with a neural network (NN), site-specific training data used for the NN can optimize its performance and robustness to new use cases.
The demonstration uses Keysight’s communications system-specific Electronic Design Automation (EDA) software to model a 3GPP physical layer and wireless channels. Instead of using the traditional channel estimation signal processing, this block has been replaced with various neural networks for channel estimation. The first NN was fully developed and trained by InterDigital and delivered to Keysight. The second NN was developed by Keysight and trained in two different ways. First using a combination of data generated by Keysight’s Electronic Design Automation System (SystemVue) software and then again using real-world measurement data. The demonstration compares performance and complexity of InterDigital and Keysight’s Machine Learning approaches to that of traditional channel estimation, and uses an EDA software environment and a real-world 144 GHz over-the-air environment.
Being able to benchmark the performance of NN and compare them to traditional methods as well as other NN is critical for the advancement of AI in 6G. Without these sorts of measurements and comparisons, the true performance gains (or losses) of AI cannot be known and the adoption of the technology will be hindered.
Milind Kulkarni, Vice President and Head of Wireless Labs at InterDigital, said: “Through partnership with Keysight, we are able to extend our ability to validate AI solutions for wireless networks. These types of collaborations and their outcomes provide valuable insight and build industry alignment as we work to shape how AI will be used in both 5G and 6G.”
Giampaolo Tardioli, Vice President, 6G and Next Generation Technology at Keysight, said: “The world is embarking on a transformative journey to revolutionize the future of connectivity with the use of AI in wireless communications. Our collaboration with strategic partners like InterDigital enables us to hone our solutions and capabilities to meet the needs of our customers as they continue pushing the boundaries of what is possible when AI and wireless are combined.”
This demonstration includes technology that was developed as part of CENTRIC and 6G-SANDBOX, projects that have received funding from the Smart Networks and Services Joint Undertaking (SNS JU) under the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation program under Grant Agreement No 101096379 & 101096328 respectively.
About Keysight Technologies
At Keysight (NYSE: KEYS), we inspire and empower innovators to bring world-changing technologies to life. As an S&P 500 company, we’re delivering market-leading design, emulation, and test solutions to help engineers develop and deploy faster, with less risk, throughout the entire product lifecycle. We’re a global innovation partner enabling customers in communications, industrial automation, aerospace and defense, automotive, semiconductor, and general electronics markets to accelerate innovation to connect and secure the world. Learn more at Keysight Newsroom and www.keysight.com.
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240221116125/en/
Paul Erwin
Americas
+1 248 430 9075
paul.erwin@keysight.com
Fusako Dohi
Asia
+81 42 660-2162
fusako_dohi@keysight.com
Jenny Gallacher
Europe
+44 (0) 7800 737 982
jenny.gallacher@keysight.com
Vegas options - thank you for sharing your thoughts here on this forum; it is much appreciated.
There were a very sizeable number of "in the money call options" on Friday's option expiration that had to go somewhere. The net effect of those shares changing hands resulted in a glut of IDCC shares to sell. Maybe Vegas_option would share his thoughts regarding this share price decline.
Last week (ending 2/16), there were several court filings in the case U-blox AG et al v. InterDigital, Inc. et al, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of California. The movement in the case ended the week with an Order granting joint motion to extend time.
Sure wish I could join all of you to celebrate Interdigital's "leap year" opportunity!
InterDigital, Inc. Just Beat Earnings Expectations: Here's What Analysts Think Will Happen Next
editorial-team@simplywallst.com (Simply Wall St)
Sun, February 18, 2024 at 8:22 AM EST
It's been a pretty great week for InterDigital, Inc. (NASDAQ:IDCC) shareholders, with its shares surging 13% to US$117 in the week since its latest annual results. The result was positive overall - although revenues of US$550m were in line with what the analysts predicted, InterDigital surprised by delivering a statutory profit of US$7.62 per share, modestly greater than expected. The analysts typically update their forecasts at each earnings report, and we can judge from their estimates whether their view of the company has changed or if there are any new concerns to be aware of. Readers will be glad to know we've aggregated the latest statutory forecasts to see whether the analysts have changed their mind on InterDigital after the latest results.
After the latest results, the three analysts covering InterDigital are now predicting revenues of US$633.1m in 2024. If met, this would reflect a notable 15% improvement in revenue compared to the last 12 months. Statutory earnings per share are forecast to tumble 32% to US$5.71 in the same period. Yet prior to the latest earnings, the analysts had been anticipated revenues of US$497.4m and earnings per share (EPS) of US$4.03 in 2024. So we can see there's been a pretty clear increase in sentiment following the latest results, with both revenues and earnings per share receiving a decent lift in the latest estimates.
It will come as no surprise to learn that the analysts have increased their price target for InterDigital 7.5% to US$126on the back of these upgrades. It could also be instructive to look at the range of analyst estimates, to evaluate how different the outlier opinions are from the mean. There are some variant perceptions on InterDigital, with the most bullish analyst valuing it at US$140 and the most bearish at US$106 per share. The narrow spread of estimates could suggest that the business' future is relatively easy to value, or thatthe analysts have a strong view on its prospects.
Taking a look at the bigger picture now, one of the ways we can understand these forecasts is to see how they compare to both past performance and industry growth estimates. The period to the end of 2024 brings more of the same, according to the analysts, with revenue forecast to display 15% growth on an annualised basis. That is in line with its 14% annual growth over the past five years. Compare this with the broader industry, which analyst estimates (in aggregate) suggest will see revenues grow 13% annually. So although InterDigital is expected to maintain its revenue growth rate, it's only growing at about the rate of the wider industry.
The Bottom Line
The biggest takeaway for us is the consensus earnings per share upgrade, which suggests a clear improvement in sentiment around InterDigital's earnings potential next year. There was also an upgrade to revenue estimates, although as we saw earlier, forecast growth is only expected to be about the same as the wider industry. There was also a nice increase in the price target, with the analysts clearly feeling that the intrinsic value of the business is improving.
With that in mind, we wouldn't be too quick to come to a conclusion on InterDigital. Long-term earnings power is much more important than next year's profits. At Simply Wall St, we have a full range of analyst estimates for InterDigital going out to 2025, and you can see them free on our platform here..
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/interdigital-inc-just-beat-earnings-132218807.html
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT - filed 2/16/24
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
126. WHEREFORE, InterDigital respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment
in favor of InterDigital as follows:
(a) That Lenovo is liable for infringement, contributing to the infringement, and/or
inducing the infringement of one or more claims of the Patents-in-Suit;
(b) An award of damages adequate to compensate InterDigital for the infringement that
has occurred, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, including prejudgment and post-judgment interest;
(c) An award of enhanced damages including, without limitation, treble damages for
willful infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
(d) An accounting and/or supplemental damages for all damages occurring after any
discovery cutoff and through the Court’s decision regarding the imposition of a permanent
injunction;
(e) An award of attorneys’ fees based on this being an exceptional case pursuant to 35
U.S.C. § 285, including prejudgment interest on such fees;
(f) Enter a permanent injunction against all Lenovo products found to infringe the
Patents-in-Suit;
(g) Award, in lieu of an injunction, a compulsory forward royalty;
(h) Costs and expenses in this action; and
(i) An award of any further relief that this Court deems just and proper.
Dated: February 16, 2024
InterDigital (IDCC)
Bank of America Securities analyst Tal Liani reiterated a Buy rating on InterDigital yesterday and set a price target of $140.00. The company’s shares closed last Thursday at $116.15, close to its 52-week high of $116.88.
According to TipRanks.com, Liani is a 5-star analyst with an average return of 13.8% and a 60.9% success rate. Liani covers the Technology sector, focusing on stocks such as CrowdStrike Holdings, Palo Alto Networks, and CyberArk Software.
InterDigital has an analyst consensus of Moderate Buy, with a price target consensus of $136.00, representing a 20.6% upside. In a report released yesterday, Roth MKM also maintained a Buy rating on the stock with a $132.00 price target.
https://www.tipranks.com/news/blurbs/analysts-offer-insights-on-technology-companies-applied-materials-amat-epam-systems-epam-and-interdigital-idcc?utm_source=webullapp.com&utm_medium=referral
Noteworthy Thursday Option Activity: MMI, IDCC, TDOC
February 15, 2024 — 03:19 pm EST
Written by BNK Invest for BNK Invest ->
Interdigital Inc (Symbol: IDCC) saw options trading volume of 1,949 contracts, representing approximately 194,900 underlying shares or approximately 57.1% of IDCC's average daily trading volume over the past month, of 341,160 shares. Particularly high volume was seen for the $97.50 strike put option expiring April 19, 2024, with 300 contracts trading so far today, representing approximately 30,000 underlying shares of IDCC
Tomorrow (Friday 2/16) is "option expiration date". So I expect a considerable amount of volatility as decision makers jockey for position to accommodate IDCC's updated financials. Next on the calendar is a three day weekend since Monday the markets are closed in celebration of Presidents Day. Tuesday should prove challenging for the margin clerks to contact those still holding a short position in IDCC. I'd like to see several brokerage firms initiate coverage for the stock later this month (and/or next month).
Now I'm heading out to the beach!
Will Top-Line Decline Hurt InterDigital (IDCC) Q4 Earnings?
Zacks Equity Research
Tue, Feb 13, 2024, 8:16 AM EST
InterDigital, Inc. IDCC is scheduled to report fourth-quarter 2023 results on Feb 15, before the opening bell. IDCC pulled off a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 170.71%, on average. Despite its global reach and diversified tech-based product portfolio, the company is likely to have witnessed top-line contraction due to competitive market and macroeconomic headwinds.
Factors at Play
During the quarter, InterDigital announced that it has extended its partnership with the University Carlos III of Madrid (UC3M) in Spain. Over the years, the collaboration has contributed valuable research inputs within the wireless ecosystem. The latest agreement will further reinforce this long-standing partnership and accelerate research in advanced integrated sensing and communications in next-generation cellular systems, 5G Advanced and 6G. This is likely to be reflected in the upcoming quarterly results.
In the fourth quarter, InterDigital inked a strategic partnership with the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, to expedite research for advanced 5G and 6G networks. The strong research foundations of the two entities are expected to accelerate critical advancements in MIMO systems. Integration of Advanced MIMO will extend network coverage area and facilitate ultra-low latency communications, supporting applications such as augmented reality and autonomous vehicles.
In addition, 6G powered by Advanced MIMO will offer the extensibility needed to support high bandwidth-intensive applications like metaverse experiences and holographic communications. This is likely to have generated incremental revenues during the quarter.
However, stiff competition is forcing InterDigital to invest significantly in technological innovation and R&D to get an edge over other players in the competitive wireless equipment industry. This is putting pressure on the company’s margins. The rising debt burden has also been affecting its growth potential. Macroeconomic uncertainty and geopolitical volatility remain a headwind. These factors are likely to have had a negative impact on the top line.
For the December quarter, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenues is pegged at $104 million, indicating a decrease from $117 million reported in the prior-year quarter. The consensus estimate for adjusted earnings per share stands at $1.21, suggesting an improvement from the prior-year quarter’s reported figure of $1.08.
Earnings Whispers
Our proven model does not predict an earnings beat for InterDigital this time around. The combination of a positive Earnings ESP and a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold) increases the chances of an earnings beat. That is not the case here.
Earnings ESP: Earnings ESP, which represents the difference between the Most Accurate Estimate and the Zacks Consensus Estimate, is 0.00%, with both pegged at $1.21. You can uncover the best stocks to buy or sell
Tesla tells UK court it has Avanci 4G license but wants preferential 5G rate, estimates Avanci’s coverage at 80%
January 3, 2024
Context: In early December 2023, Tesla filed a patent action with the High Court of Justice in London, challenging the validity and essentiality of three InterDigital patents and seeking a FRAND determination with respect to the entire Avanci 5G pool, and only as a fallback with respect to only InterDigital’s contribution to the pool (case no. HP-2023-000042).
What’s new: Today ip fray has obtained the first four documents from the electronic court docket. The particulars of claim outline what Tesla is seeking and contain the first publicly accessible confirmation of what IP experts have assumed since the near-simultaneous withdrawal of multiple enforcement actions: Tesla has an Avanci 4G license.
Direct impact: It is unclear why (of all 60+ Avanci licensors) InterDigital was picked as Tesla’s primary target. For InterDigital it is presumably not an option to give up on the three challenged patents with respect to the UK. With respect to Avanci, it is questionable whether the UK court even has jurisdiction, given that Tesla would be free to take bilateral licenses from InterDigital as well as any other Avanci licensee.
Wider ramifications: Similarly to Lenovo’s current UK action against Ericsson, Tesla is seeking out the UK as a supposedly implementer-friendly jurisdiction. Decisions on certain pending FRAND appeals might reverse that trend, though. While there is nothing unusual about Tesla’s defensive claims against three InterDigital patents, the UK court does not even have FRAND jurisdiction over InterDigital’s portfolio unless the patentee brings infringement counterclaims, prevails on at least one standard-essential patent (SEP), and seeks an injunction. If the UK court exercised jurisdiction over Avanci in the present cirumstances, and even more so if it agreed with Tesla even to a limited extent, the entire SEP pool system would be in jeopardy, which wouldn’t even benefit Tesla on the bottom line. Furthermore, Tesla’s current course of action may lead various 5G SEP holders to bring infringement lawsuits in various jurisdictions, and Tesla would presumably not be able to neutralize those complaints through antisuit injunction requests.
As outlined in the fray4 summary above. the first legal question is jurisdiction, and there are distinct jurisdictional questions.
First, these are the claims:
(1) Declarations that the Challenged Patents are invalid.
(2) An order for revocation of the Challenged Patents.
(3) Declarations that the Challenged Patents are not essential to the 5G Standard.
(4) A declaration that Tesla is a beneficiary of the FRAND Commitment(s) of InterDigital and/or the Avanci 5G Pool Members in accordance with Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy.
(5) A declaration that the terms of the SPLA in so far as they relate to any patents in the Avanci 5G Pool which designate the United Kingdom are not FRAND and therefore do not comply with the relevant FRAND commitments given under Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy; alternatively, a declaration as to the terms which are FRAND for those patents (alternatively, such patents within that pool as are owned by InterDigital).
(6) A declaration that a FRAND licence covering the Challenged Patents, the InterDigital UK SEP Portfolio, the InterDigital International Portfolio or the portfolio(s) of any and each other Avanci 5G Pool Member (whether examining only United Kingdom patents or more broadly) is a licence (i) between Tesla and Avanci, (ii) that is worldwide in scope and (iii) covers the entirety of the Avanci 5G Pool.
(7) A declaration that InterDigital and all other Avanci 5G Pool Members may not prevent or interfere with the conclusion between Tesla and Avanci of a FRAND licence determined by the Court.
(8) A declaration that, by operation of the FRAND Commitment under French law and by virtue of the undertaking given by Tesla to the Court at paragraph 44 above, Avanci is required to enter into a licence with Tesla covering the Challenged Patents and/or the Avanci 5G Pool on such terms as are determined by the Court to be FRAND.
(9) A declaration that terms proposed by Avanci for a licence between Tesla and Avanci covering the Avanci 5G Pool (including the Challenged Patents) are not FRAND.
(10) A determination of what the FRAND terms would be for a licence between Tesla and Avanci covering the Avanci 5G Pool (including the Challenged Patents).
(11) Costs.
(12) Further or other relief including such further declarations as may be appropriate, together with any appropriate interim and protective relief and appropriate orders to require mediation resolution as the Court deems fit.
Jurisdiction is a given (unless and until InterDigital gives up on those patents, which is almost inconceivable) with respect to Tesla’s attempts to shoot down (declaration of inv alidity and order for revocation) the UK parts of three EPO-granted patents held by InterDigital: EP3718369 on “initial access and channel access in new radio/new radio-unlicensed (nr/nr-u)”, EP3566413 on “quality of service management for interworking between different communication architectures” and EP3455985 on a “new radio downlink control channel”.
It’s a well-trodden path. Potential and actual defendants to infringement lawsuits in the UK or other jurisdictions already went to UK courts many years ago with such claims, most of the time just seeking rulings they could use as persuasive authority in foreign fora, particularly for the purpose of getting German infringement cases stayed. The particulars of claim don’t explain (at least not convincingly) why of all 60+ Avanci licensors InterDigital was singled out. Most likely it had nothing to do with any particular interactions between InterDigital and Tesla, but the reason may be that Tesla was encouraged by the same UK court’s FRAND determination in an InterDigital v. Lenovo case.
But whether Tesla, prior to making its first 5G-compatible car, is entitled to declaratory judgment of non-essentiality of those patents ot the 5G standard is at least questionable.
Then come the FRAND claims, raising even more difficult jurisdictional questions. Take claim 4:
“A declaration that Tesla is a beneficiary of the FRAND Commitment(s) of InterDigital and/or the Avanci 5G Pool Members in accordance with Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy.”
If the court so declared, 60+ Avanci licensors that are not named as defendants would be bound without having been given the opportunity to make their case. This is not to say that any of them necessarily would disagree that Tesla is a beneficiary, but theoretically any or all of them might.
With respect to Avanci, Tesla’s filing appears ambivalent: Tesla says in para. 42 that the availability of bilateral licenses from each Avanci licensor is not the answer because “it would be impractical and onerous for Tesla, or any other such third party, to negotiate and enter into bilateral licences with each Avanci 5G Pool Member.” In fact, Tesla even wants the UK court to hold that a bilateral license from InterDigital would not be FRAND: only an Avanci pool license would be (though some of its claims are, as a fallback, limited to the InterDigital-owned part of the Avanci pool). That means Avanci is recognized as part of the solution, yet Tesla treats Avanci–in and through this action–as part of the problem, and is putting Avanci and by extension the entire SEP pool system in jeopardy.
What makes this aspect even more perplexing is that if Tesla prevailed on this “only pool is FRAND” claim over InterDigital, it could go to any 5G patent holder (such as Apple) and force them to join the Avanci pool.
Tesla’s lawyers from Powell Gilbert are asking the court to order Avanci to grant a license on court-determined terms. That is a license that a pool administrator simply can’t grant without an agreement involving each and every one of its licensors, of which Tesla is suing only one in this case (InterDigital). In order to get there, Tesla wants the UK court to extend the Avanci licensors’ obligations resulting from their ETSI FRAND declarations to Avanci, the pool administrator, for which there is no legal precedent anywhere in the world.
The fact that claim 8 would impose an obligation on Avanci that it can’t fulfill without the cooperation of 60+ parties (as it doesn’t own the patents in question) brings one of the oldest legal concepts to mind. In Ancient Rome, it was a legal principle that ultra posse nemo obligatur (alternatively ad impossibilia nemo tenetur), which means no one is obligated (by a court of law) to do more than they can.
By contrast, Tesla’s position that dozens of bilateral license agreements aren’t possible is a non sequitur. If Avanci as a pool administrator managed to work out an agreement with and between those 60+ parties (while also talking to implementers in order to understand what license terms they would accept), why can’t Tesla with its vast resources compared to Avanci?
Tesla took its Avanci 4G license in 2021. Tesla’s logo never appeared on Avanci’s website, nor was there a press release or any other public confirmation. In the UK court filing, Tesla acknowledges that Avanci covers 80% of all cellular SEPs, but argues that it took the license in 2021 only because of pending litigation by three Avanci licensors (Sisvel, IP Bridge and PanOptis). A footnote furthermore mentions proceedings brought by Sharp and Conversant.
What the particulars of claim do not say is that no injunction was being enforced against Tesla at the time. Nor do they acknowledge that by now almost the entire car industry is licensed to Avanci’s 4G pool, with litigation having been brought against only a few automakers. The new 5G pool has already been accepted by seven brands (BMW, Mini, Rolls-Royce, Genesis, Hyundai, KIA, Mercedes) and not a single 5G infringement case has been brought by an Avanci licensor against a car maker. That fact alone makes it highly unlikely that InterDigital was threatening Tesla with litigation, much less at a time where Tesla’s cars are not even supporting 5G yet.
Tesla’s filing merely talks about the intended use of 5G. They downplay the added value of 5G, saying “the intended adoption by Tesla of 5G will serve only to futureproof its vehicles in anticipation of the eventual phase out of the 4G network,” and deny that they will make use of vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications (which Tesla says is also supported by 4G, not only 5G). Tesla’s lawyers want to bring down the pool rate from the $32 standard rate ($29 “early-bird” rate), possibly to as little as $10 based on a reference to a paper written by a competition lawyer, though the particulars of claim do not specify the exact number Tesla has in mind.
Tesla downplays the value of 5G for automotive purposes. 5G’s advantages are manifold and not limited to bandwidth. Lower latency is key to safety features, to give just one example.
Tesla’s set of claims is unprecedented. The parts that Tesla is most interested in (i.e., the claims relating to a pool license and not just three random InterDigital patents) are at a high risk of dismissal on jurisdictional grounds, or at least of being narrowed or deemed in need of amendment, such as by adding all other Avanci licensors to the case. A court order that would effectively impose an obligation on 60+ licensors as well as the pool administrator to enter into agreements that would enable the pool administrator to comply with a court order to grant the desired license to Tesla on the latter’s preferred terms would not merely be unprecedented. It would be unbelievable and unthinkable given more than two millennia of European legal history going back to the times before Julius Caesar ruled Rome.
If we imagine the unimaginable for the sake of the argument, how would it benefit Tesla to disrupt the Avanci model? Would the world be a better place for car makers? Would SEP licensing for automotive use cases become cheaper on the bottom line?
As long as Tesla is seeking the impossible (forcing everyone into a pool and then forcing the pool to grant a license on the licensee’s preferred terms), there can’t even be a settlement. Avanci is not in a position to give Tesla what it wants or any part thereof. It took them years to work out the terms of the 5G pool. If Tesla pursues this case, Avanci will have no choice but to defend itself, especially not when some of Tesla’s claims are ambitious to say the least.
Despite those questions, let there be no doubt about the complaint being architected in a sophisticated manner. There is, however, a jurisdictional hurdle at the outset and the endgame is unclear, as litigation and licensing have different dynamics.
Justice Mellor will presumably struggle with some of this, starting with the case management question that Tesla wants to go straight to the FRAND part, skipping the invalidity and non-essentiality claims against three particular InterDigital patents.
ip fray will keep an eye on this dispute. Tesla is one of the most amazing companies of our times and it now has brought a legal action over SEP licensing that is astonishing. The history of legal attacks by automotive industry players on Avanci is that all of them failed. The European Commission never formally acted upon complaints brought by Daimler, Continental and others over Nokia’s refusal to license suppliers, which was an indirect attack on Avanci. Continental’s federal lawsuit in the U.S. was thrown out and the appeal failed. A Thales division brought a case in Munich that was dropped after an acquisition. In the meantime, Avanci’s 4G pool was adopted by almost the entire car industry, the 5G pool is off to a promising start, and other pools (such as the aftermarket and electric-vehicle charger pools) have been launched. It’s noteworthy that various automotive suppliers joined Avanci over time, as did companies advocating implementer-friendly positions. Some recent UK FRAND determinations may have been to implementers’ liking, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the UK judiciary desires to dictate global automotive SEP licensing terms in a dispute between American companies (Tesla, InterDigital, Avanci).
ip fray
To receive new articles by email,
go to the home page and enter your email address
in the field in the right-hand column.
Follow ip fray on LinkedIn:
?
?
So GM didn't decide to join Tesla by attacking Avanci and trying to wedge out IDCC in an academic argument about FRAND. Nice!
InterDigital (IDCC) Aims to Develop Immersive Media Delivery
February 13, 2024 — 08:18 am EST
Written by Zacks Equity Research
InterDigital Inc. IDCC has joined forces with Broadpeak to spearhead advancements in immersive media delivery. The collaboration aims to develop robust content delivery networks capable of streaming MPEG Visual Volumetric Video-based Coding (V3C) immersive content at scale.
Founded in 2010 and headquartered in Cesson Sevigne, France, Broadpeak designs and manufactures video delivery components for content providers and network service providers deploying video streaming services over fixed, mobile or satellite broadband networks.
Volumetric video, integral to immersive experiences, presents a bandwidth challenge. The MPEG V3C standard addresses this by defining efficient coding and streaming mechanisms. InterDigital's expertise in mobile, video and AI technology, alongside Broadpeak's prowess in CDN and advanced video streaming solutions, forms the backbone of this venture.
InterDigital and Broadpeak will showcase their groundbreaking achievements in streaming volumetric video content to wide audiences at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. The collaboration represents a significant stride toward enhancing the delivery of immersive media and revolutionizing the streaming landscape, offering new possibilities for content providers and enriching user experiences.
InterDigital’s commitment to licensing its broad portfolio of technologies to wireless terminal equipment makers, which allows it to expand its core market capability, is laudable. It has leading companies, such as Huawei, Samsung, LG and Apple, under its licensing agreements. Consequently, the company expects to generate solid recurring revenues from the patent licensing business in the forthcoming quarters as well.
IDCC’s global footprint, diversified product portfolio and ability to penetrate different markets are impressive. Apart from the company’s strong portfolio of wireless technology solutions, the addition of technologies related to sensors, user interface and video to its offerings is likely to drive significant value, considering the massive size of the market it licenses. Furthermore, the company remains committed to pursuing acquisitions to drive its product portfolio and boost organic growth.
The company is focused on pursuing agreements with unlicensed customers in the handset and consumer electronics markets. InterDigital aims to become a leading designer and developer of technology solutions and innovation for the mobile industry, IoT and allied technology areas by leveraging its research and development capabilities, technological know-how and rich industry experience. At the same time, it intends to enhance its licensing revenue base by adding licensees and expanding into adjacent technology areas that align with its intellectual property position.
InterDigital appoints Ken Kaskoun as Chief Growth Officer
Source: GlobeNewswire Inc.
InterDigital, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC), a mobile, video and AI technology research and development company, today announced that Ken Kaskoun has been appointed as the company’s Chief Growth Officer, reporting to Liren Chen, President and Chief Executive Officer of InterDigital.
An engineer and lawyer by background and an experienced inventor, Ken joins from SomaLogic, a life sciences company, where he was Senior Vice President of Strategy and Business Development.
“Ken’s experience in the development of long-term growth strategies for technology research and licensing companies makes him an excellent fit as InterDigital’s Chief Growth Officer,” commented Liren Chen, President and Chief Executive Officer of InterDigital. “With InterDigital’s strong financial performance, our licensing momentum, and our focus on growth in areas such as video and cloud services, we are ideally positioned to capitalize on new prospects and deliver even greater shareholder value.”
“I am delighted to join InterDigital as Chief Growth Officer at such an exciting time in the company’s development,” Ken Kaskoun said. “InterDigital’s recent trajectory and technological prowess in wireless, video and AI offer an excellent platform to drive growth from existing programs and from greenfield opportunities.”
Prior to SomaLogic, Ken spent 15 years at Qualcomm in various IP-related roles, most recently as Vice President of the Strategy and Analysis team in Qualcomm Technology Licensing (QTL).
Ken has a BSEE from Old Dominion University, a JD from the University of San Diego, and is a member of the State Bar of California. He is the inventor of more than 30 granted patents and pending applications.
About InterDigital®
InterDigital is a global research and development company focused primarily on wireless, video, artificial intelligence (“AI”), and related technologies. We design and develop foundational technologies that enable connected, immersive experiences in a broad range of communications and entertainment products and services. We license our innovations worldwide to companies providing such products and services, including makers of wireless communications devices, consumer electronics, IoT devices, cars and other motor vehicles, and providers of cloud-based services such as video streaming. As a leader in wireless technology, our engineers have designed and developed a wide range of innovations that are used in wireless products and networks, from the earliest digital cellular systems to 5G and today’s most advanced Wi-Fi technologies. We are also a leader in video processing and video encoding/decoding technology, with a significant AI research effort that intersects with both wireless and video technologies. Founded in 1972, InterDigital is listed on Nasdaq.
InterDigital is a registered trademark of InterDigital, Inc.
For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com.
Noteworthy Monday Option Activity: COHR, IDCC, ALGN
February 05, 2024 — 03:19 pm EST
Written by BNK Invest
Interdigital Inc (Symbol: IDCC) options are showing a volume of 2,518 contracts thus far today. That number of contracts represents approximately 251,800 underlying shares, working out to a sizeable 76.7% of IDCC's average daily trading volume over the past month, of 328,185 shares. Particularly high volume was seen for the $100 strike put option expiring February 16, 2024, with 1,667 contracts trading so far today, representing approximately 166,700 underlying shares of IDCC.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/noteworthy-monday-option-activity:-cohr-idcc-algn
IDCC Short Interest -
As of 1/12/24 4,204,887 shares, up from 4,121,369 on 12/29/23. EOM
My take (for what its worth)
Per $1,000 Convertible bond:
* Converts to 12.9041 shares
* The first $77.49 x 12.9041 = $1,000 is paid in cash
* The next $106.35 - $77.49 = $28.86 is paid in either cash OR shares at IDCC's sole election
* The warrants I don't know what the specifics are???
* Question: Doesn't this set of circumstances prompt a meeting between InterDigital and the "hard core shorts"?
InterDigital announces convertibility of 3.50% senior convertible notes due 2027
Feb. 05, 2024 8:53 AM ETInterDigital, Inc. (IDCC) StockBy: Tiyashi Datta, SA News Editor
InterDigital (NASDAQ:IDCC) on Monday said, pursuant to the terms of the indenture governing its 3.50% Senior Convertible Notes due 2027, the notes are convertible during its calendar quarter ending March 31, 2024.
The current conversion rate of the notes is 12.9041 shares of InterDigital’s common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the notes.
Upon the conversion of any notes, InterDigital will pay cash up to the aggregate principal amount of the notes to be converted, and will pay cash, shares of its common stock or a combination of cash and shares for any conversion obligation in excess of the aggregate principal amount being converted at InterDigital’s election, as set forth in the indenture.
My head hurts!
The Rise of the UK as a Preferred Destination for IoT Patent Disputes: Tesla’s FRAND Action Highlights the Country’s Growing Appeal in the IoT and Automotive Sectors
BY TOM GARDNER ON JANUARY 31, 2024 2:33 AM
Title: The Rise of the UK as a Preferred Destination for IoT Patent Disputes
Introduction:
The English courts have become a favored destination for implementers of standard essential patents (SEPs) in the Internet of Things (IoT) space. This shift in perception is evident in Tesla’s recent FRAND action against Avanci and InterDigital, highlighting the UK’s growing appeal for patent disputes in the automotive and IoT sectors.
SEPs and the IoT Landscape:
SEPs are patents that are essential to implementing a particular standard, such as those used in IoT devices. With the rapid growth of the IoT industry, the number of patent disputes involving SEPs has also increased. These disputes often revolve around fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms.
The UK’s Favorable Approach:
The English courts have gained a reputation for their balanced and pragmatic approach to SEP disputes. Implementers are increasingly turning to these courts, seeking a fair and predictable outcome. This trend is in contrast to the perception that the UK was previously more favorable to patentees.
Tesla’s FRAND Action:
Tesla’s recent FRAND action against Avanci and InterDigital is a clear example of this shift. The electric vehicle manufacturer has chosen to file its lawsuit in the UK, signaling its confidence in the country’s legal system. The case revolves around licensing terms for SEPs used in Tesla’s connected car technology.
Implications for the IoT Industry:
The rise of the UK as a preferred destination for IoT patent disputes has significant implications for the industry. Implementers now have a viable option for resolving SEP disputes in a jurisdiction known for its expertise in intellectual property matters. This trend may encourage other companies to follow Tesla’s lead and choose the UK as their forum of choice for resolving IoT-related patent disputes.
The Importance of FRAND:
The concept of FRAND licensing is crucial in the IoT industry, as it ensures fair access to essential technologies and promotes innovation. The English courts’ approach to FRAND disputes provides clarity and guidance to both patentees and implementers, fostering a more balanced and efficient licensing ecosystem.
Conclusion:
The UK’s growing appeal as a destination for IoT patent disputes, as evidenced by Tesla’s FRAND action, highlights the country’s reputation for providing a fair and predictable legal environment. As the IoT industry continues to expand, the importance of resolving SEP disputes in a balanced and efficient manner becomes paramount. With its expertise in intellectual property matters, the UK is well-positioned to play a significant role in shaping the future of IoT patent licensing.
Tesla tells UK court it has Avanci 4G license but wants preferential 5G rate, estimates Avanci’s coverage at 80%
January 3, 2024
Context: In early December 2023, Tesla filed a patent action with the High Court of Justice in London, challenging the validity and essentiality of three InterDigital patents and seeking a FRAND determination with respect to the entire Avanci 5G pool, and only as a fallback with respect to only InterDigital’s contribution to the pool (case no. HP-2023-000042).
What’s new: Today ip fray has obtained the first four documents from the electronic court docket. The particulars of claim outline what Tesla is seeking and contain the first publicly accessible confirmation of what IP experts have assumed since the near-simultaneous withdrawal of multiple enforcement actions: Tesla has an Avanci 4G license.
Direct impact: It is unclear why (of all 60+ Avanci licensors) InterDigital was picked as Tesla’s primary target. For InterDigital it is presumably not an option to give up on the three challenged patents with respect to the UK. With respect to Avanci, it is questionable whether the UK court even has jurisdiction, given that Tesla would be free to take bilateral licenses from InterDigital as well as any other Avanci licensee.
Wider ramifications: Similarly to Lenovo’s current UK action against Ericsson, Tesla is seeking out the UK as a supposedly implementer-friendly jurisdiction. Decisions on certain pending FRAND appeals might reverse that trend, though. While there is nothing unusual about Tesla’s defensive claims against three InterDigital patents, the UK court does not even have FRAND jurisdiction over InterDigital’s portfolio unless the patentee brings infringement counterclaims, prevails on at least one standard-essential patent (SEP), and seeks an injunction. If the UK court exercised jurisdiction over Avanci in the present cirumstances, and even more so if it agreed with Tesla even to a limited extent, the entire SEP pool system would be in jeopardy, which wouldn’t even benefit Tesla on the bottom line. Furthermore, Tesla’s current course of action may lead various 5G SEP holders to bring infringement lawsuits in various jurisdictions, and Tesla would presumably not be able to neutralize those complaints through antisuit injunction requests.
As outlined in the fray4 summary above. the first legal question is jurisdiction, and there are distinct jurisdictional questions.
First, these are the claims:
(1) Declarations that the Challenged Patents are invalid.
(2) An order for revocation of the Challenged Patents.
(3) Declarations that the Challenged Patents are not essential to the 5G Standard.
(4) A declaration that Tesla is a beneficiary of the FRAND Commitment(s) of InterDigital and/or the Avanci 5G Pool Members in accordance with Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy.
(5) A declaration that the terms of the SPLA in so far as they relate to any patents in the Avanci 5G Pool which designate the United Kingdom are not FRAND and therefore do not comply with the relevant FRAND commitments given under Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy; alternatively, a declaration as to the terms which are FRAND for those patents (alternatively, such patents within that pool as are owned by InterDigital).
(6) A declaration that a FRAND licence covering the Challenged Patents, the InterDigital UK SEP Portfolio, the InterDigital International Portfolio or the portfolio(s) of any and each other Avanci 5G Pool Member (whether examining only United Kingdom patents or more broadly) is a licence (i) between Tesla and Avanci, (ii) that is worldwide in scope and (iii) covers the entirety of the Avanci 5G Pool.
(7) A declaration that InterDigital and all other Avanci 5G Pool Members may not prevent or interfere with the conclusion between Tesla and Avanci of a FRAND licence determined by the Court.
(8) A declaration that, by operation of the FRAND Commitment under French law and by virtue of the undertaking given by Tesla to the Court at paragraph 44 above, Avanci is required to enter into a licence with Tesla covering the Challenged Patents and/or the Avanci 5G Pool on such terms as are determined by the Court to be FRAND.
(9) A declaration that terms proposed by Avanci for a licence between Tesla and Avanci covering the Avanci 5G Pool (including the Challenged Patents) are not FRAND.
(10) A determination of what the FRAND terms would be for a licence between Tesla and Avanci covering the Avanci 5G Pool (including the Challenged Patents).
(11) Costs.
(12) Further or other relief including such further declarations as may be appropriate, together with any appropriate interim and protective relief and appropriate orders to require mediation resolution as the Court deems fit.
Jurisdiction is a given (unless and until InterDigital gives up on those patents, which is almost inconceivable) with respect to Tesla’s attempts to shoot down (declaration of inv alidity and order for revocation) the UK parts of three EPO-granted patents held by InterDigital: EP3718369 on “initial access and channel access in new radio/new radio-unlicensed (nr/nr-u)”, EP3566413 on “quality of service management for interworking between different communication architectures” and EP3455985 on a “new radio downlink control channel”.
It’s a well-trodden path. Potential and actual defendants to infringement lawsuits in the UK or other jurisdictions already went to UK courts many years ago with such claims, most of the time just seeking rulings they could use as persuasive authority in foreign fora, particularly for the purpose of getting German infringement cases stayed. The particulars of claim don’t explain (at least not convincingly) why of all 60+ Avanci licensors InterDigital was singled out. Most likely it had nothing to do with any particular interactions between InterDigital and Tesla, but the reason may be that Tesla was encouraged by the same UK court’s FRAND determination in an InterDigital v. Lenovo case.
But whether Tesla, prior to making its first 5G-compatible car, is entitled to declaratory judgment of non-essentiality of those patents ot the 5G standard is at least questionable.
Then come the FRAND claims, raising even more difficult jurisdictional questions. Take claim 4:
“A declaration that Tesla is a beneficiary of the FRAND Commitment(s) of InterDigital and/or the Avanci 5G Pool Members in accordance with Clause 6.1 of the ETSI IPR Policy.”
If the court so declared, 60+ Avanci licensors that are not named as defendants would be bound without having been given the opportunity to make their case. This is not to say that any of them necessarily would disagree that Tesla is a beneficiary, but theoretically any or all of them might.
With respect to Avanci, Tesla’s filing appears ambivalent: Tesla says in para. 42 that the availability of bilateral licenses from each Avanci licensor is not the answer because “it would be impractical and onerous for Tesla, or any other such third party, to negotiate and enter into bilateral licences with each Avanci 5G Pool Member.” In fact, Tesla even wants the UK court to hold that a bilateral license from InterDigital would not be FRAND: only an Avanci pool license would be (though some of its claims are, as a fallback, limited to the InterDigital-owned part of the Avanci pool). That means Avanci is recognized as part of the solution, yet Tesla treats Avanci–in and through this action–as part of the problem, and is putting Avanci and by extension the entire SEP pool system in jeopardy.
What makes this aspect even more perplexing is that if Tesla prevailed on this “only pool is FRAND” claim over InterDigital, it could go to any 5G patent holder (such as Apple) and force them to join the Avanci pool.
Tesla’s lawyers from Powell Gilbert are asking the court to order Avanci to grant a license on court-determined terms. That is a license that a pool administrator simply can’t grant without an agreement involving each and every one of its licensors, of which Tesla is suing only one in this case (InterDigital). In order to get there, Tesla wants the UK court to extend the Avanci licensors’ obligations resulting from their ETSI FRAND declarations to Avanci, the pool administrator, for which there is no legal precedent anywhere in the world.
The fact that claim 8 would impose an obligation on Avanci that it can’t fulfill without the cooperation of 60+ parties (as it doesn’t own the patents in question) brings one of the oldest legal concepts to mind. In Ancient Rome, it was a legal principle that ultra posse nemo obligatur (alternatively ad impossibilia nemo tenetur), which means no one is obligated (by a court of law) to do more than they can.
By contrast, Tesla’s position that dozens of bilateral license agreements aren’t possible is a non sequitur. If Avanci as a pool administrator managed to work out an agreement with and between those 60+ parties (while also talking to implementers in order to understand what license terms they would accept), why can’t Tesla with its vast resources compared to Avanci?
Tesla took its Avanci 4G license in 2021. Tesla’s logo never appeared on Avanci’s website, nor was there a press release or any other public confirmation. In the UK court filing, Tesla acknowledges that Avanci covers 80% of all cellular SEPs, but argues that it took the license in 2021 only because of pending litigation by three Avanci licensors (Sisvel, IP Bridge and PanOptis). A footnote furthermore mentions proceedings brought by Sharp and Conversant.
What the particulars of claim do not say is that no injunction was being enforced against Tesla at the time. Nor do they acknowledge that by now almost the entire car industry is licensed to Avanci’s 4G pool, with litigation having been brought against only a few automakers. The new 5G pool has already been accepted by seven brands (BMW, Mini, Rolls-Royce, Genesis, Hyundai, KIA, Mercedes) and not a single 5G infringement case has been brought by an Avanci licensor against a car maker. That fact alone makes it highly unlikely that InterDigital was threatening Tesla with litigation, much less at a time where Tesla’s cars are not even supporting 5G yet.
Tesla’s filing merely talks about the intended use of 5G. They downplay the added value of 5G, saying “the intended adoption by Tesla of 5G will serve only to futureproof its vehicles in anticipation of the eventual phase out of the 4G network,” and deny that they will make use of vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications (which Tesla says is also supported by 4G, not only 5G). Tesla’s lawyers want to bring down the pool rate from the $32 standard rate ($29 “early-bird” rate), possibly to as little as $10 based on a reference to a paper written by a competition lawyer, though the particulars of claim do not specify the exact number Tesla has in mind.
Tesla downplays the value of 5G for automotive purposes. 5G’s advantages are manifold and not limited to bandwidth. Lower latency is key to safety features, to give just one example.
Tesla’s set of claims is unprecedented. The parts that Tesla is most interested in (i.e., the claims relating to a pool license and not just three random InterDigital patents) are at a high risk of dismissal on jurisdictional grounds, or at least of being narrowed or deemed in need of amendment, such as by adding all other Avanci licensors to the case. A court order that would effectively impose an obligation on 60+ licensors as well as the pool administrator to enter into agreements that would enable the pool administrator to comply with a court order to grant the desired license to Tesla on the latter’s preferred terms would not merely be unprecedented. It would be unbelievable and unthinkable given more than two millennia of European legal history going back to the times before Julius Caesar ruled Rome.
If we imagine the unimaginable for the sake of the argument, how would it benefit Tesla to disrupt the Avanci model? Would the world be a better place for car makers? Would SEP licensing for automotive use cases become cheaper on the bottom line?
As long as Tesla is seeking the impossible (forcing everyone into a pool and then forcing the pool to grant a license on the licensee’s preferred terms), there can’t even be a settlement. Avanci is not in a position to give Tesla what it wants or any part thereof. It took them years to work out the terms of the 5G pool. If Tesla pursues this case, Avanci will have no choice but to defend itself, especially not when some of Tesla’s claims are ambitious to say the least.
Despite those questions, let there be no doubt about the complaint being architected in a sophisticated manner. There is, however, a jurisdictional hurdle at the outset and the endgame is unclear, as litigation and licensing have different dynamics.
Justice Mellor will presumably struggle with some of this, starting with the case management question that Tesla wants to go straight to the FRAND part, skipping the invalidity and non-essentiality claims against three particular InterDigital patents.
ip fray will keep an eye on this dispute. Tesla is one of the most amazing companies of our times and it now has brought a legal action over SEP licensing that is astonishing. The history of legal attacks by automotive industry players on Avanci is that all of them failed. The European Commission never formally acted upon complaints brought by Daimler, Continental and others over Nokia’s refusal to license suppliers, which was an indirect attack on Avanci. Continental’s federal lawsuit in the U.S. was thrown out and the appeal failed. A Thales division brought a case in Munich that was dropped after an acquisition. In the meantime, Avanci’s 4G pool was adopted by almost the entire car industry, the 5G pool is off to a promising start, and other pools (such as the aftermarket and electric-vehicle charger pools) have been launched. It’s noteworthy that various automotive suppliers joined Avanci over time, as did companies advocating implementer-friendly positions. Some recent UK FRAND determinations may have been to implementers’ liking, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the UK judiciary desires to dictate global automotive SEP licensing terms in a dispute between American companies (Tesla, InterDigital, Avanci).
ip fray
To receive new articles by email,
go to the home page and enter your email address
in the field in the right-hand column.
Follow ip fray on LinkedIn:
?
?
In the last 20 minutes of trading, 100,000 shares changed hands but in my mind that isn't "mojo worthy". We need a new license agreement that directly impacts the bottom line to move upward to the next level. JMHO
Jealmc79 - Thank you for providing the information from the SEC filing that states the election of cash would be used to retire the convertible bond issue. I was not aware of that.
InterDigital Joins Princeton University’s NextG Corporate Program
Source: GlobeNewswire Inc.
InterDigital, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDCC), a mobile and video technology research and development company has announced that it has joined Princeton University’s NextG Initiative, dedicated to corporate partnerships advancing technology, policy, and industry-academia-government partnerships related to wireless, cloud, and networks of the future. The NextG Initiative, led by Princeton’s School of Engineering and Applied Science, supports the foundation for future intelligent networks across wireless, networking, and cloud systems. The initiative will focus on cross-disciplinary approaches that utilize new algorithms and AI approaches to make networks scalable, efficient, secure, and accessible.
Participation within Princeton’s NextG program unlocks graduate research support and the potential to shape public-private partnerships and policy. As a member of the NextG corporate partnership program, InterDigital will contribute critical research around the topic of AI in wireless. Specifically, InterDigital will advance research on high quality, realistic, and usable channel models for native AI, enhanced MIMO, integrated sensing and communications, and other future wireless applications.
“We are excited to deepen our research partnership with Princeton University and contribute to its NextG program bringing together critical members of industry, academia, and government to advance networks of the future and better understand the benefits of AI to wireless networks,” said Rajesh Pankaj, InterDigital’s EVP and Chief Technology Officer. “Princeton University’s prestige and reputation for leading-edge wireless research and policy influence complements InterDigital’s forward looking research to make our networks and modes of communication more efficient, secure, and impactful.”
“The best academic research to help realize the promise of future wireless networks is informed by close interactions between faculty and industry technology leaders,” said Andrea Goldsmith, dean of Princeton’s School of Engineering and Applied Science. “Our NextG program aims to foster those deep collaborations around wireless technology, as well as policy, that are required to drive meaningful innovation and global leadership in an era of rapid change.”
“InterDigital is a key member of the NextG effort,” added Kaushik Sengupta, co-director of Princeton’s NextG Initiative and a professor of electrical and computer engineering. “Given its experience in wireless, mobile, and networking technologies, we expect this collaboration will be highly productive.”
About InterDigital ®
InterDigital develops mobile and video technologies that are at the core of devices, networks, and services worldwide. We solve many of the industry’s most critical and complex technical challenges, inventing solutions for more efficient broadband networks, better video delivery, and richer multimedia experiences years ahead of market deployment. InterDigital has licenses and strategic relationships with many of the world’s leading technology companies. Founded in 1972, InterDigital is listed on Nasdaq.
InterDigital is a registered trademark of InterDigital, Inc.
For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com.
InterDigital Contact:
Roya Stephens
Email: roya.stephens@interdigital.com
+1 (202) 349-1714
Teecee56 - I'm not necessarily "concerned" but I have been keeping an eye on the number of shares outstanding. If the remaining convertible bonds were exchanged for shares, there is a corresponding increase in outstanding shares. I have previously posted that I anticipate [and may very well be wrong] that an additional cash award may be received resulting from the appeal from the Lenovo litigation. Management may be able to justify a second Dutch Auction. I understand that I am implying a lot of different assumptions here but the outstanding share count will be a factor. JMHO
Jealmc79 - I'm just looking for confirmation that the 2016 convertible bond issue has been completely retired. And I want to know the current status of the warrants that were associated with that bond issue.