InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[jmspaesq]

data:RE: "The Mandate"

Well I'm not sure what you're asking for? My take on 'the mandate'??? Not sure what that means.

Not trying to be evasive but if you could restate the question it would help?

I do know this. It was CRUCIAL to resolve the ERICY issues, and in some ways more important symbollically and as a stepping stone than in terms of what the settlement actually paid ($34 M minus the insurance reimbursement).

I know that many were disappointed in the dollar amount. Given some of the projections of $$$billions$$$ by some (mickeymath) I can see that. Even I thought it might be more than it was ($100M).

But IMHO and I think this is what HG is saying, it was a warning shot across the bow of all who would infringe. After MOT IDCC had to prove that it would do what it took to get paid. MOT weakened our position even in the ERICY case.

So when HG speaks of a 'new environment' and/or 'new framework' that's what I think he's talking about. The retroactive payment was symbollically HUGE, no matter what one thought of the dollar amount.

The 'new framework' going forward is more important--the future being more important than the past.

The mandate was to show that we would see it through to payment, and payment in that case equalled victory. And the victory is the message it sends to all.

I think that the unfulfilled portion of the mandate is now collecting from NOK and Samsung. the issues left unfinished as well have to do with 3G deals. The NOK and Samsung payments may now be linked to 3g deals which may explain the delay.

The 'new framework' as a result of the fulfilled mandate is to get paid without litigating having made it clear that when we threaten to litigate we're going to follow through and get paid anyway.

I dunno if that even remotely addresses the issue(s) you wanted me to address?