The company may continue to have these skirmishes. The key is to maintain the relationship while they convert from the dry cleaner pricing model to a more uniform model.For whatever reasons ( survival, domestic industry, misunderstanding), we must shift for FRAND and a better relationship with our licensees. We fell into a nice cure in China since we agreed to arbitrate license terms in order to get out of the antitrust trap which gives us a proper position to set a uniform rate with others, new and old. Once we get a few more licensees under a more standard rate, the rest will be far more receptive. They will still have to be creative when offering two different methods of royalty pay (yearly lump or per terminal) to be sure to avoid an Apple situation. The yearly lump method must be based solely upon the representations of the licensee and any deviations from their estimated production and sales shall cause an amended rate in order to conform to FRAND obligations that each party signed in becoming members of the standards body. IDCC and the standards organization should make membership in the organization mandatory for any manufacturer who seeks to produce standards compliant products with the intent to place same into commerce. Every licensee and potential licensee must understand that FRAND obligations prevent them from offering any concessions that a reasonable man could construe as creating an advantage over existing customers in the global market. Apparently China believes that deals are OK in their local market, but I believe Qcom and IDCC should be careful with such arrangements. This precedent may start a gold rush from every manufacturer regarding their territories qualifying for a lower rate. Our corkscrew tailed computer bullies do not believe in paying their early inventive success forward to the inventions that now have allowed them back in the game.
MO
loop
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
