"to profit from their settlement"

Is this legal, ie: insider trading?

Is this the HTC Incredible?

"I think Nokia might owe in the 500 million dollar are so that would be a big savings for them"

I don't see why you think it would be a big savings for NOK...I would hope IDCC would expect and demand a higher offer based on what NOK owes them.

IMO: I've always felt there was a conspiracy among MEN, led by NOK, to keep IDCC down.

"A conspiracy of mass proportions orchestrated by an unknown entity"

Could that entity be NOK? I believe NOK thinks that if they could keep the share price down it would give them an advantage in negotiations with IDCC.

"I think this can be a big plus if the right partner is chosen. IDCC has a history of successful partnerships that can add both to the bottom line as well as to their credibility in the industry. Which, of course, helps licensing efforts going forward. I wonder who the candidates might be. Anyone have some ideas? "

How about Apple?

Why can't they announce the name of the renewal?

Which law firm is handling the ITC appeal? TIA

From IDCC's Mar 9 announcement:

"In addition, InterDigital has identified additional royalty obligations in a routine audit of an existing licensee. The new patent license agreement and resolution of the audit issues combined will add approximately $40 million in royalty revenue between the first and second quarters of 2010."

I also believe they have something planned for Q2.

"Nokia (NYSE: NOK) has improved the way it measures the global device market, including coming up with a better way to calculate the number of unlicensed and counterfeit products being sold in the market."

What hypocritical BS!

3rd qtr guidance was on Aug 17 or 20 days after 2nd qtr results of Jul 28, so we should get 4th qtr guidance by Nov 17 or I hope by Nov 20 which is options expiration.

I agree that we would lose if the company went private (or a public buyout for that matter) and don't want that to happen. I'm trying to understand how the process to go private would work.

For example:

1. Would the IDCC board of directors make an offer for our shares?

2. How is the price determined?

3. Could they use the cash on hand, ie: $400 mill plus?

4. Do they only need 51% of the shares to gain control?

etc, etc, etc.

TC suggests that IDCC may decide to go private.
Could someone please explain the process and what that means to shareholders? Thanks.

TC suggests that IDCC may decide to go private.
Could someone please explain the process and what that means to shareholders? Thanks.

Does the current LG license expire at end of 2010?

"We derive our $33 price target by applying a 10x multiple to our adjusted 2010 EPS estimate of $3.30."

I don't follow TC's logic. He says the licensing of MEN will give IDCC an EPS of $3.30 but also infers that the ITC loss will delay the signing of MEN past 2010?

"TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATION "...What does this mean?

So no review for infringement but a review for validity?

"pNOKio"...that is really funny but true!

"it will not increase IDCC's incremental quarterly revenues above what they normally would report"

Oops, should have read your post before making those rough projections...thanks for the info.

For you Mickey those estimates are pretty conservative.
My rough projections:

Revenues of ~ 360 mil per year based on current 75 mil per qtr plus addt'l 60 mil per year assuming 182 mil spread over next 3 years.

Expenses of 140 mil per year (2nd qtr was 35 mil).

Net earnings of ~ 140 mil per year (220 * 65%).

EPS of $3.50 assuming 40 mil shares.

All this without NOK!

"Additionally, the ban would not set a rate which is the real issue that both sides have been haggling about for years."

NOK cannot afford a ban...if the comission rules for a ban, NOK WILL SETTLE!

Is the only reason for the DE stay was because the same patents were being used in the ITC case? If yes, then why not use different patents so that the DE case could continue?

"InterDigital also has filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that Nokia's 3G mobile handsets and components infringe the InterDigital patents identified in InterDigital's ITC complaint."

I was not aware that both the ITC and DE refenced the same patents, and I don't understand this strategy. With all the 3G essential patents that IDCC claims to have, why not use a different set of patents for each case so that these cases could continue simultaneously?

"if IDCC were able to obtain a ban against the Nokia 3G products in issue in the current case and Nokia tried to import different 3G products, IDCC could file a new ITC complaint against these products and obtain an injunction against them within 90 days if it was clear that these new products were essentially infringing the same patents that were already decided in the current case"

Thanks, it is really good to know IDCC has that option!

"I truly believe that nokia is willing to wait until the case is sent to a jury in Delaware, as even with a ban, they are going to get a rate that is far less than what they maintain an essential patent is worth"

So if a ban is issued you think NOK will still wait until Delaware, which means the ban could be in effect for 2 or more years...IMO that would really stupid as they would lose the entire US 3G market to others!

Can the new '579 patents be part of the appeal that IDCC will present to the comission?

"It used for both scrambling at the transmitter and decrambling at the receiver, which is the UE, data of a higher speed shared control channel."

Thanks for providing what seems very clear to this layman that Dr. Gitlin was describing a handset and base station...looks like the ALJ was the one who was asleep at the switch!

"They issued the new patents to make it beyond a shadow of the doubt that the technology applies to handsets."

The IDCC lawyers should have done this at the hearing, IMO they were asleep at the switch.

"IDCC will layout any errors Luckern made in great detail for the comission"

So IDCC will have the opportunity to present their case to the comission before they decide?

IMO, I still think there will be a settlement (today or tomorrow) and not a decision for 3 reasons:

1. The ALJ asked for a settlement update on Aug 8 so he could avoid the task of writing up his ID, and I don't think the parties would want to piss off the ALJ if he wrote his decision and subsequently they settled. The ALJ would want assurances that a settlement would occur, ie: not just promises that "we are close".

2. Why would the ALJ hold up his ID if the parties were not going to settle? It is possible that he did receive a settlement assurance but the parties just need more time to work out the final details.

3. NOK is not stupid...a ban would be a disaster for their future.

"Up until that point (i.e. the ruling) there is no reason to sign on the dotted line."

You make it sound like NOK has nothing to lose since they can accept IDCC offer up until "that point when the judge rules", so tell me how does NOK know when "Up until that point" is?
Once the judge rules the old offer is off the table.

Since the ITC judge will give his ID on Friday I expect a settlement announcement after the market closes on Thursday.

"he was told that he didn't have to file his final ID"

Who told him this? If true, then a settlement by Friday?

Wasn't there a comment from IDCC in the distant past that said QCOM would need a 3G license from them for the higher bands?

"this post is not political"

What???? You are violating your own rules! This does not belong here!

Rev, has any Chinese company, eg: ZTR, licensed with Qualcomm? TIA

"even though I myself predict that China will not license"

They will if they want to sell in the US, ie: IDCC can use the ITC!

This is frustrating: buyout announced, TC rates a BUY, and IDCC cannot even keep up with the market...not easy being an IDCC shareholder!

Some questions about TC report:

He says a NOK 3G license would be for the years 2010-2014. What about the years prior to 2010, esp 2009?

He says a NOK 3G license would be for $0.35 to $0.50 per handset, compared to QCOM who gets at least $4 per handset. Why does QCOM deserve 8 to 11 times the handset rate that IDCC gets? In the past there was a discussion on this board about which companies had what 3G patents and I recall that though QCOM had more 3G patents, QCOM did not have 8 to 11 times the 3G patents as IDCC? I know some patents are more valuable than others, but I thought that IDCC was very strong in the air interface patents, so why the huge difference in handset rates?