InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[The Count]

I'm confused too

Like AndrewNCU, my understanding was if a foreign company was infringing on ANY patent then there would be a violation and the remedy available to the ITC was to ban the products from sale in the US.

Like Desert Dweller, I thought that without consideration there could be no contract.

Equitable Estoppel has me baffled because the first requirement is that IDCC did not inform Samsung that IDCC intended to enforce the patent against it. Declaring the patent to the ETSI seems to this ignorant laymen to be clear evidence of IDCC's intention to enforce the patent. Seems that IDCC would've had a reason to ask for summary judgment, yet somehow Samsung felt there case was so strong they could get a summary judgement. WTF??

Thanks to Squingebob and Revlis for sharing their experience and thoughts freely here.

The good news is that Samsung seems to acknowledge that they need to license. I think LG sets the benchmark for the value of the patents. I've worked on some business valuations for divorce proceedings and there are many different ways to compute the value. However if you are able to find a similar business that sold in an arms length transaction in the recent past, that would carry much more weight then all the discounted cash flow analysis reports. But that was from last century and involved restaurants, so it's probably not relevent either.

Yup, I'm confused. However I still see strong evidence that IDCC has essential patents and will get paid. When and how much are the billion dollar question. I believe IDCC management will get it done. I hope it's sooner rather than later.