InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Learning2vest]

Loop, please go back and (re)read the following statement by Data Rox in his post #228263 a few minutes ago while replying to Bull Dozer's questions:
....................................

"Haven't you held in the past that according to industry practices IDCC couldn't expect to exact royalties from chip manufacturers?(Bdozer's q)

correct - there may be a patent or 2 which is used at chip level, but almost all do not apply to chip." (Data Rox's response)

Have done my best to explain the difference between patents with rights that are in effect and therefore enforceable at the chip level vs at the device application level, but have never been able to get that concept across. OK,.... tell me why an industry savvy good guy like DR would believe that most of IDCC's "air interface" application patents are NOT ENFORCEABLE AT THE CHIP LEVEL???

Hint - because chip level patents are about (1)- how to make the chips, and (2)- how the dumb-assed "do it the same way every time" electrical circuits are laid out on the die. Chip level patents are NOT about what happens when those components are installed in a product running software engineered to produce specific application performance results for something like a cell phone or data card.

Those "higher level" application performance patents like IDCC owns are only in effect and enforceable at the "end user" OEM product level where the functions described in their protected functional description claims become evident. (Aw Shucks! I give up. It takes way too many words to 'splain it.)