InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Corp_Buyer]

Indemnity: "Methinks, it's not so serious" ...

... I agree, there are many mitigating factors:

1) The indemnity may well be broad across many modes of 3G, however it was not provided to all customers. Evidently, the indemnity does not benefit Ericy (since Idcc and Ericy have a "3G framework in place") nor Nokia nor Samsung (since "3G licensing with Ericy would trigger licensing terms with Samsung and NOK"), nor NEC, Hopon, etc., so this is certainly not an industry-wide issue as to all potential 3G licensees and our largest potential licensees are not affected.

2) the improper (and illegal?) indemnities provided are very likely capped by contract to a fairly small exposure i.e. not an unlimited indemnification. Accordingly, that would tend to make the indemnity issue more of a negotiating point that a customer might "raise" with IDCC but not a show stopper to a license with IDCC. If the cap is relatively small (likely), then the customer would have little to gain by refusing to license with IDCC and seeking refuge under the indemnity.

3) the reason the indemnifier has not been dislosed, IMO is precisely because this is a fringe issue and IDCC is attempting to resolve the matter quietly, directly, fairly, and amicably with the offending "wireless" company to the benefit of IDCC. Remember today our adversary or competitor, tomorrow our partner (e.g. Ericy), so IDCC apparently and rightfully doesn't want to poison the relationship yet with a disclosure or shot accross the bow, just yet.

Your thoughts?

JMHO,
Corp_buyer