InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[my3sons87]

Whether we liked the answers to the questions or not at least they discussed the issues. The insider selling question would have caught anyone off guard, and I don't see how a prepared reply to this question would have made it any more palatable.

What Howard did say was that he only sold a miniscule amount of his IDCC holdings.

The person asking the question about the timing of the sales could have been anyone. Does anyone know who he was? It was a good question and caused Howard to dance around alittle but so what. The issue of positive licensing royalty payments gets buried under some water under the bridge insider sales. The person asking about the insider sales should have asked about the JPO patents and potential licensees and revenues. It makes we wonder why he even asked the question.

Nokia is on tract for Arb, and we should have IDCC's answer to Nokia's motion by the 25th. I found it refreshing when Howard stated that the sealing of the IDCC/Ericy litigation was a joint request of the parties, and agreed to by a Federal judge.

Having read Nokia's motion, if I were the Judge IDCC wouldn't even have to entertain filing a counter motion on the issues Nok cited. They would have been bounced out of my court room on their Azz along with the nonsense motion they presented. There would have been no question as to my opinion of that motion and the reason why it was brought forth. In fact, being in Texas I might have instructed my Baliff to get my "GAT" so I could bust a few caps.