InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[0nceinalifetime]

Your msg contains many inaccuracies and mischaracterizations but I don't have the time to address them all at this time. But you should reconsider this:

Since Q no longer manufactures infrastructure or handsets, it is very doubtful that they will pay any more royalty or license fees to IDCC. The only product that Q currently manufacturers is chips. Since IDCC follows standard industry practice by not licensing at the chip level, I don’t think Q will need to update their license with IDCC. Q would only need to update with IDCC, if they began making handsets and infrastructure again IMO.

I take exception to your claim that the current industry practice is to not charge royalties at the chip level. Currently, QCOM recieves an IPR royalty payment at the chip level for every CDMA ASIC that is not marketed by QCOM. That flies in the face of your claim. In otherwords, If the handset has a competitors ASIC inside then Qualcomm collects a royalty on the ASIC AND on the handset.

Because IDCC has announced plans to market their own ASIC (in conjuction with a partner), one would assume they would (like Qualcomm) want to charge other ASIC makers at the chip level if IDCC's IPR was required. Otherwise, the same royalty would be due on a phone with an IDCC ASIC inside as on a phone with a competitors ASIC. In this case, companies who competed with IDCC for ASIC marketshare would be getting free use of IDCC's IPR at the ASIC level.

It is a falacy that it is industry standard practice for the IPR holders to not license or collect royalties at the ASIC level. This is a rumor that was started to hide the fact that IDCC doesn't have significant essential IPR at the ASIC level and the big chip makers won't play the blackmail/nuisance IPR game.

Once