Ronny
Could you furnish your opinions as to IDCC's essential patents in CDMA2000? Does IDCC currently have any "issued" patents that you feel are essential to CDMA2000, other than what QCOM has sublicensed rights to? Any issued patents that might be commercially important to CDMA2000, other than what QCOM has sublicensed rights to? Do you feel that IDCC might have some "applied for" patents for CDMA2000 in the pipeline that may be essential, and for which QCOM would not have sublicense rights to? Does Tantivy have any currently issued patents that you feel are essential for CDMA2000? Why do you think that IDCC's seems to be insistant that companies need to license CDMA2000 from us as well? As always, thanks for sharing your opinions.
IMO, the lack of specific 2G and 3G CDMA licensing by both IDCC and Tantivy takes one down the path that there is little or no "esential" IPR that IDCC offers (you asked for outside of QCOM) that a company would want to license at the "IDCC rate". Certainly not with up front fees (similar to the Hop On deal). Even if the new licensees we just got don't make CDMA2000 (unlike ERICY that makes/made CDMA2000 products including modules), you would think that IDCC would license them, eh? What about the recent license with RIMM? Why not them? They make CDMA products.
....speaking of Hop-On - they've been busy licensing from the guys that usually don't announce licensing deals (all PR came from Hop On)
Wed 9:15am HPON.PK Alcatel Licenses Hop-On Under GSM and GPRS Standards - PR Newswire
Mon Aug 4 HPON.PK Siemens Licenses Hop-On Under GSM and GPRS Standards - PR Newswire
Thu Jul 31 HPON.PK Hop-On Signs Licensing Agreement With Philips for GSM and GPRS Standard - PR Newswire
Tue Jul 29 HPON.PK Motorola Licenses Hop-On Under Essential Patents Covering GSM, GPRS and CDMA Standards - PR Newswire
Fri Jul 25 HPON.PK Hop-On Signs Patent License Agreement With Lucent Technologies Inc. - PR Newswire
Wed Jul 23 HPON.PK Ericsson Licenses Hop-On Under GSM and GPRS Standards - PR Newswire
---------------------
JOHN BUCHER: In your introductory comments, you mentioned Samsung and you mentioned CDMA2000 1X. I'm just curious from that reference, is it the company's opinion that the licensees -- users of CDMA2000 1X technology may need an InterDigital license?
HOWARD GOLDBERG: John, we have taken that position going back a while ago, that we have IPR in the form of patents and/or patent applications that is essential to all of the 3G standards. And 1X is part of the 3G standards, and we've rolled out a few license agreements at the beginning of our activities. That includes that standard, so certainly others have examined. We've gone through a normal commercial process of weighing out our patents and claim charts, and others have examined this situation and included that they would require a license agreement from us.
JOHN BUCHER: So that's notwithstanding the 1994 agreement with Qualcomm if some of these CDMA2000 1X equipment suppliers have an agreement with Qualcomm, then it's your intention that they may need an agreement with you?
HOWARD GOLDBERG: John, that 1994 agreement has increasingly narrow impact. Certainly there were, within the scope of the cross-license, it accomplished some of the then important patents that InterDigital held, but the cutoff date was for 1995 as far as early in 1995 as far as included inventions and InterDigital has done a tremendous amount of work since that period of time and a lot of inventive work that has collectability (ph) to CDMA2000, as well as acquiring certain IPR (ph).
JOHN BUCHER: Is it possible that you might make available to investors a white paper or a descriptive summary that just describes what parts of the technology in CDMA2000 1X that you believe falls outside of that 1994 agreement and that falls inside your scope of intellectual property?
HOWARD GOLDBERG: That's something that I will discuss with Bill Merritt and we'll see if it's something that we would feel comfortable with. Normally we don't engage in parallel negotiations in the sunlight but I'll discuss that issue with him and see if he is comfortable with it.
JOHN BUCHER: OK, I think that would be very helpful. And then, finally, I know that you mentioned in the call earlier that you had just about all of the major PDMA/GSM equipment suppliers now covered with this agreement. Could you just review for us the wide-band CDMA license agreements that you have, the equipment suppliers that you do have wide-band CDMA licenses with?
GUY HICKS: Sure, John, this is Guy. Let me go through those and I'll have Rich and Howard either add to it or add color to that. We previously announced that we have a 3G agreement with Infinium (ph). (inaudible) Nokia. Over the last 18 months we've also signed 3G agreements with Sharp, with Matsushita, which operates under the brand name of Panasonic, also with NEC, Japan Radio Corporation and then most recently with the smaller manufacturer Hoppon (ph) and also with Pantivia (ph), part of the broader agreement that Howard referred to earlier.
JOHN BUCHER: OK, great, that's all the wide-band CDMA agreements that you have to date?
GUY HICKS: Right, 3G licensees, correct.
JOHN BUCHER: OK, super. Did those agreements also include CDMA2000 1X? Is that within the scope of those agreements?
GUY HICKS: Depends on the particular agreement.
JOHN BUCHER: So each is individually negotiated, then.
GUY HICKS: Yes, that is correct. And that's our pattern.
JOHN BUCHER: OK, fantastic. Like I said, I would welcome disclosure from the company if you can do it on those specifics of the technology that you feel you all have claim to on CDMA2000 1X and congratulations on your agreement with Ericsson.
GUY HICKS: Thank you, John.
