Nokia court filing and scope of 1999 license. From the main filing document on page 10 (or page 16 of the PDF file) as follows:
"In addition, InterDigital has told different stories to different courts at different times about the scope of the 1999 License on which it bases its pending motion. In this proceeding, InterDigital representative William Merritt represented to this Court, under oath, that the 1999 License covers all 3G technologies (at least until it expires):
In January 1999, InterDigital and Nokia Corporation entered into a negotiated patent license agreement. Under that agreement, InterDigital granted to Nokia Corporation a worldwide non-exclusive license under essentially all of
InterDigital's 1,609 active issued patents and 5,077 active pending patent applications. Those patents include InterDigital’s TDMA and CDMA patents, which apply to 2G products such as GSM and US-TDMA, as well as 3G products
such as WCDMA and cdma2000 products.”
(Merritt Decl. 12 (emphasis added).) In patent litigation pending between the parties in England, however, in describing “[w]hat is covered by the Patent License Agreement,”InterDigital claimed that “as regards 3G CDMA equipment per se, the license does not extend to such technology” (Exh. M at 3). Both of the 3G standards referenced by Mr. Merritt are “3G CDMA standards.”10 InterDigital’s UK position directly contradicted its position in this case. And InterDigital has recently adopted yet another position in the UK proceedings, contending that its previous statement should be amended to read, “as regards 3G CDMA equipment per se, the paid-up license does not extend to such technology” (Exh. N at 4, 6 (emphasis in original)). But InterDigital offers no explanation for this substantial change in its understanding of the 1999 License, characterizing its flip-flopping as “clarification” (id. at 4), rather than conceding that its stance changes to suit its negotiating position."
Jim and Dave thanks for the additional court documents. My question refers to the alleged comment by Goldberg in Exh. M. However, Schedule M of the additional documents is only about a Nokia 3G handset. It has no comment at all about the 3G scope of the agreement supposedly made in error by Goldberg. It is clear from IDCC's licensing page that Nokia's 1999 contract covers 3G products. Can anyone find the supporting documents referencing this alleged conflicting statement by Goldberg?
AI
