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.
Red.
In your experience, would Nokia likely appeal immediately, or wait till near the end of the 30 days time limit?
Corp.
Can you cite any precedent for an appeals court unilaterally imposing sanctions in a contract case?
Mschere.
I think "all" would be a good guess.
Dave.
If Nokia has never appealed a federal court decision, that's worthy of notice. But why no comments from the peanut gallery?
If you add that little tidbit to,
"We're still using IDCC's patents", and
"We're going to sit down and talk, after reviewing our options",
and appeal might be a 50/50 shot.
That's better than most here expect.
Revlis.
Yes, I know.
That's one of my points.
Do you think the average investor knows?
And, even if they do, they're looking for guarantees, and are still afraid that Nokia will upset the applecart.
They bounce in and out of the stock, like they know what they're doing, while completely ignoring the fact that a little flea from KOP has beaten The Snake at his own game.
This is not bleeding.
Although knowledgable shareholders are reading between the lines and delighted with recent rulings, cautious investors are reacting to Nokia's blabbing about filing an appeal, and POSSIBLY engaging in talks with IDCC, which may or may not take place.
Most do not realize that Nokia has now lost 7 out of 10 legal efforts to make mincemeat out of IDCC, because the courts are not going along with their flimsy attempts to make something out of nothing.
Mschere.
Chew on this.
There are three Nokia legal actions still hanging fire.
Forget the Lanham Act claim, for the moment, and ask yourself this question:
How can Nokia look Judge Pumfrey (U.K.) in the eye, and continue to waste his time with lawsuits to invalidate 2G and 3G patents, while little ole' Riita (Nokia spokeswoman) admits to the press that they're still using IDCC patents?
Loop.
Note that the line was unsecured.
Loop.
Scusa, if I take a little license, re: "When you have them by the gonads, their hearts and minds will follow."
After you said that, I can't get this picture out of my mind:
It's Loreana Bobbitt standing atop the bell tower in Philadelphia, looking toward Finland, waving something in her hand.
Spider.
Agree.
Settling ALL issues with Nokia is the key to unlocking revenues from Samsung, Ericy/SNE, and others.
If Nokia appeals (as a negotiating ploy), IMO, talks would continue for one simple reason:
Appeals can be withdrawn, as quickly as they can be filed.
Gman. Zackly.
When the award was announced in July, it got little attention from the media, or on Nokia's Yahoo website.
Even CNBC failed to report the award.
Now that a U.S. judge has converted the award to a judgment, it's being watched around the globe.
The more "watchers", the more Nokia will have to act like a responsible corporate citizen, whether or not they appeal.
Loop.
A Yahoo Board lawyer told me privately that he believes Judge Pauley will rule (in favor of IDCC) along the following lines, assuming there is no appeal:
1. The Award is confirmed.
2. Nokia will pay the amount owed by a date certain, in accordance with the ICC award.
3. If Nokia fails to provide the information necessary to arrive at the amount owed, IDCC will go back to the judge and advise him that Nokia is not complying with his order.
Do you agree or disagree?
BTW, smoke 'em, if ya got 'em.
They said virtually the same about QCOM's lawsuit.
IMO, Nokia hasn't the slightest regard for the truth.
If Jorma was Pinnochio, his nose would stretch from New York to Finland, and back.
Oso.
Agree.
Even though QCOM thought talks with Nokia were progressing for a GSM license, and were caught in The Snake's trap, IDCC's position is far different.
In addition to NY, final arguments are scheduled for January 30 in the U.K. 2G trial, and pre-trial discussions are scheduled for March on 3G.
I believe you're correct, that the parties asked for a delay in their letters to Judge Pauley. Proof of this could be downplaying the dismissal, and emphasizing talks.
But if Nokia agreed to talk, I believe Bill would not give them more than 30 days to sign or get off the pot.
Why did IDCC put the spotlight on future discussions with Nokia, rather than dismissal of the Delaware suit?
What has caused IDCC to believe that, after refusing to honor the ICC award, refusing to report sales to IDCC, and refusal to allow an audit of its books, Nokia will suddenly sit down and seriously discuss resolving these issues?
Loop, Jim, Dan, and all the IHUBer's.
Have a Merry Xmas, guys.
It's been a pleasure.
Ghors.
Nokia is still batting 1,000.
They have yet to win one of the 8 cases filed in the last 18 months or so.
I wouldn't want to be on the other end of the line from Finland to NY, if Judge Pauley throws another punch by the end of January.
One would think Nokia's NY boyz would wanna be fair, and at least offer a discount.
Thank you Ghors.
I was hoping you'd show up.
I value your opinions highly, and for obvious good reason.
Could this be four birds with two stones?
1. It would seem that Judge Farnam blasted The Snake out of the water on 3G in the U.S. Might this also apply to Nokia's 3G action in the U.K.? As I recall, the pretrial conference is scheduled for March 2006.
2. If Judge Pauley does the same in NY before January 30, 2006, could this affect the outcome of final arguments in Nokia's 2G case in the U.K., which are scheduled for that date?
Amr.
Even their reserve picture is becoming more complex:
They reserved $483 million in December 2004, at a Euro rate of 1.35, versus the current 1.18.
Interest of all kinds, is probably $100 million, or thereabouts, and growing daily.
But QCOM has now upset the "reserve applecart" by suing for GSM royalties.
We will know more in February/March when we see their next report. But I'm thinkin' Jorma doesn't like the way things are going. And he only has 6 months to make repairs, before he becomes the "former chairman".
Teecee.
Yeah. And, as luck would have it, Jorma is looking at the flip-side.
At one time, there was relatively little difference between portfolio earnings, and prejudgment interest.
Although he seems to care little about how he spends shareholders' money, he may think twice before doubling or tripling the ante.
Add that little tidbit to his high-priced NY lawyers, who allowed The Snake to invade Judge Pauley's courtroom, and you may have trouble in River City.
Dan.
"The interest rate goes up".
The rate, after a ruling by Judge Pauley, could be a bummer for Nokia.
In one nearby state, the prejudgment rate is 6%. But it jumps to 12% postjudgment, if the judge rules in favor of the plaintiff.
Snakes normally don't choke, when they're trying to swallow their prey.
But Nokia may have a little trouble with this one:
$250 million award.
Statutory interest, could be a bundle.
Additional interest awarded by the ICC.
Royalties from July lst to ?
Nooze? What nooze?
No actual rate was discussed.
Loop.
It came from one of the attendees.
I can vouch for the source, 100%.
One was listening to what was said, and the other was taking notes.
Inadvertent or "otherwise", as I understand it, the IDCC attorney was furious when the rate was mentioned by the Nokia attorney.
In fact, our boy Flanagan said in open court that the Nokia statement "took his breath away."
IMO, Nokia knew exactly what it was doing.
Loop.
Do you find it interesting that Merritt used the word "frivolous" in describing Nokia's action to contest the confirmation.
Could this be a hint of what he and IDCC lawyers are thinking as their next move?
If so, when could such an accusation be converted into a formal legal action?
Why don't you and Miller get a room?
Loop.
One doesn't have to go far to see the trail of
"royalty-hating evidence" that Nokia has left for all to see.
I'm sure you'd love to take a legal swat at these bozos.
L2V.
Let's hope the ICC put some teeth in their award, that bite hard enough to bring a little sanity to Nokia's legal strategy.
While surfing Google this morning, I noticed that one article characterized the confirmation as "converting the award to a judgment".
We all know what that means. But it's a rocky road getting there.
Jim.
Now that you mention it, we haven't seen Malko for some time.
Like you, we hope he's doing fine, and just taking a little relief time from the message boards.
It's hard to believe that Nokia issued this press release in February 1999, and then tells the court that it had no other choice but to license, because IDCC is such a bully:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
(Partial)
InterDigital and Nokia announce multi-year development project for third generation technology
February 01, 1999
Nokia and InterDigital Communications Corporation (ASE: IDC) today announced a long-term co-operation agreement involving the development of new technology for third generation wireless telecommunications products designed for high data rate applications, such as Internet access.
Under the multi-year agreement, InterDigital will deliver technology building blocks for Nokia to use in third generation wireless products. The agreement, which includes paid up TDMA and CDMA patent licenses which generally extend through the project period, has an estimated value to InterDigital of approximately USD 70 million, including an initial payment of approximately USD 30 million. The companies have defined a framework for establishing licensing terms after the initial licensing period.
"Nokia is committed to furthering the development of third generation technologies, which will herald the era of a true Wireless Information Society. In addition to Nokia's own core development of third generation, we place great emphasis on additional R&D, including co-operation with key industry players," said Ahti Väisänen, Vice President, Third Generation Technology, Nokia Mobile Phones. "Nokia believes that its work with InterDigital over the next several years will complement its own development of third generation products," he said.
http://press.nokia.com/PR/199902/777334_5.html
Spencer.
I'm no attorney, but I would certainly think so.
If the judge rules in IDCC's favor, he will give Nokia a payment deadline.
If Nokia does not meet the deadline, they will be in contempt of a court order, and a number of things can happen after that.
Let's wait to till we get to that bridge, before we jump off of it.
Final arguments in the U.K. are scheduled to start on January 30.
Revlis.
Although not all of the following were resolved during his tenure as president, IDCC's list of recent accomplishments certainly deserves recognition, since Merritt was obviously working on all of them. at some point:
We broke into the military business with General Dynamics.
We won the appeals court decision in Washington.
We signed Kyocera.
We signed two chip producers in Taiwan.
We signed Royal Phillips.
We won the ICC arbitration.
We won the Lucent suit.
The Florida office was closed.
Three top dogs, IMO, were asked to leave the company, and IDCC is trying to move in a new direction.
Unfortunately, it's still all about Nokia, in Delaware, the U.K., and New York.
Revlis.
I said it in a roundabout way.
But she didn't feel the need to comment.
Although the $25,000 special bonus to Merritt seemed unworthy of an SEC filing, IDCC has made similar filings in the past.
Since Merritt's compensation was made public, I asked Janet whether this was the reason for the filing.
Here is her reply:
"Compensation with “named executives” (i.e., section 16) is now covered by 8K rules under revisions passed by SEC."
E500.
Damn. I did it again! First Miller, now you.
My post was obviously a lot worse than yours?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"by: e5oo
In reply to: JimLur who wrote msg# 120159 Date:7/23/2005 10:33:01 AM
Post #of 135231
first of all it was an accusatory claim, by loop, not a civil discussion. i should have prefaced my comments by saying that i normally look forward to loop's posts.
"people like me". idcc concerns me, and i don't care what you think, truck driver.
rah rah rah
idcc long