vegas options: You are still confused.
In your previous post you stated that "What I deduced the $70+M comes from $63M ASUS and $7-8M Pegatron."
You apparently picked up the $63 million from ASUS from the following comment in last quarter's 10-Q. As described that was a claim made by ASUS for what they called excess royalties paid under their existing license. They lost. It had nothing to do with any prepayments.
"With respect to its arbitration counterclaim for fraudulent inducement, Asus stated in its pleadings that it was seeking return of excess royalties (which totaled close to $63 million as of the August 2016 date referenced in the pleadings and has increased with additional royalty payments made by Asus since such time), plus interest, costs and attorneys’ fees. The evidentiary hearing in the arbitration was held in January 2017, and the parties presented oral closing arguments on March 22, 2017. On August 2, 2017, the arbitral tribunal issued its Final Award. The tribunal fully rejected Asus’s counterclaim, finding that InterDigital did not fraudulently induce Asus to enter into the 2008 Asus PLA. Accordingly, the tribunal dismissed Asus’s fraudulent inducement counterclaim in its entirety."
I don't know where you got the $7-$8 million for Pegatron, except as a balancing amount to come up with your $70+ million. Again, the Pegatron litigation has nothing to do with prepayments.
As far as your comment about "giving up their frand defense", the ZTE infringement case is the only one where a company dropped their FRAND defenses.
