InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[IDoCare]

In para 24 it states that the majority concluded that Sony-Ericsson is a Major Competitor under the Master Agreement.

In para 25 it states that Sony-Ericsson is not one of the 3 Major Competitors specifically identified in the Master Agreement and that the Award also correctly states that
Sony-Ericsson is not, under New York law, a successor or assign of Ericsson.

In para 26 it states that the Award nevertheless concludes that Sony-Ericsson qualifies as a Major Competitor sufficient to trigger certain Nokia royalty obligations under the PLA.

In para 27 it concludes that the majority rewrote the contract, exceeded its authority, manifestly disregarded the settled law and reached a totally irrational result.

I am not a lawyer but IMO this seems to be legal jibberish! Any comments?