Mickey
First of all, I never said IDCC could not prove that Nok is, was or has been attempting to avoid paying IDCC money. If the shareholders are willing to wait 3 more years for an affirmed jury verdict/judgment, we can probably get a finding of willful infringement from April 26, 2006 to date of the judgment.
As to your argument about Nok being licensed would cause all of the others to rush to Kop with pens in hand, they were our first 3g license. We proudly displayed their name on our website. We did not have to tell the rest of the sector about the rate because it was confidential. They continued to be licensed until April 2006.
I mentioned the cash situation and bonuses because you were talking duress which has not been alleged by IDCC in any of its actions. Nok has paid IDCC 342 million dollars since 1999.
I do not understand how you got back in the stock selecting March calls and you want IDCC to take Nok all the way through the legal system. What event has changed your mind from licensing in early 2009 to jury verdicts and affirmation in 2012? Why put the patent base at risk if licensing gets us paid on most terminals going forward? I have presented to you why the royalty is lower for 3g than 2g. From the looks of things, IDCC may be in line for a bump in 4g. It will be much easier to negotiate a piece of 4g with all existing licensees than still haggling in the courts for 3g with Nok and SNE.
I am worn out now. If you post again on the subject, you win by default. Many things can happen between now and 2012 outside the control of IDCC and I believe a file cabinet full of paying licensees and empty in legal is far better than half and half.
MO
loop
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
