Ghors: IMO there is only one PLA which covers both 2G and 3G. The PLA does not specify what standards are covered, but states Covered Subscriber Units and Covered Infrastructure. These terms are defined in the Master Agreement (unavailable) and that is where the standards are most likely defined. As we know from all public statements the license is supposed to cover both 2G and 3G.
In regard to the “triggers”, or “Major Competitor License” as it is called in the PLA, apparently only Motorola, Ericsson (and Sony Ericsson), and Lucent were defined in the Master Agreement. The way I read the PLA terms, Nokia is required to accept the terms of the first “Major Competitor License” i.e trigger. However, they have the option of selecting the terms of what is called a “non-Major Competitor License Agreement” or “MFL Agreement”. Rather than being named, these “MFL Agreements” companies are defined by various financial or sales statistics. I am sure that LG would qualify as an “MFL Agrement “ company if Nokia decided to accept their terms.
Here are some of the PLA terms that I think apply.
InterDigital Grant. ITC hereby grants and shall cause IDC and their Affiliates to grant to Nokia a non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide, royalty-bearing license under the InterDigital Patents (excluding Patents for which the license is provided under the TDD Development Agreement) to design, make, have made (if substantially designed by Nokia), use, import, sell and otherwise distribute Covered Subscriber Units and Covered Infrastructure.
......................
Royalty Payments;
Period 2
Absent an agreement by the parties to the contrary, Nokia’s royalty payments during Period 2 shall be determined thru the application of most favored licensee rights, as set forth in this Section. Nokia shall be considered a most favored licensee of ITC with regard to (i) any Major Competitor License Agreement or (ii) other ITC or IDC patent license agreement involving at least IS54/136 and/or GSM and signed on or after the Effective Date with any entities having sales (at time of agreement execution) assets in excess of $US[**] or in excess of [**] Covered Subscriber Units (“Large Entity”) (i) and (ii) collectively being referred to as the “MFL Agreements”). In applying this MFL status, Nokia may elect whether or not to accept a non-Major Competitor License Agreement as an MFL Agreement. If Nokia elects not to accept a non-Major Competitor License Agreement as an MFL Agreement, Nokia shall not be required to make any payments based on such agreement but shall also shall waive any MFL rights as to such agreement. If Nokia accepts such agreement as an MFL agreement, Nokia’s royalty payments during Period 2, subject to Nokia’s exercise of its available MFL rights under future MFL Agreements, shall be determined under (C ) and (D) below. Nokia shall be required to accept as an MFL Agreement the first Major Competitor License Agreement but may later substitute another MFL Agreement, unless the MFL rights to such agreement has been waived by Nokia.
(C)
[**], Nokia shall pay royalties to ITC for Period 2 sales on equivalent terms and conditions as those set forth in the MFL Agreement last imposed on (in the case of the first Major Competitor License Agreement), or selected by (in the case of all other MFL Agreements), except for any payment obligations which shall solely be determined in accordance with Section (C) and (D).
[**]
(i) Once such Royalty Rates have been determined, that Royalty Rate for Period 2 shall be applied to sales made by Nokia and its Affiliates during Period 2. In addition, [**]
(ii) [**]
(iii) For Period 2, Nokia shall pay royalties to ITC based on the Royalty Rate for Period 2. If the applicable MFL Agreement provided for running royalty payments, Nokia’s payments shall be on the same basis. If the applicable MFL Agreement provided for payment on a lump sum basis, Nokia shall pay on a lump sum basis. As part of the MFL application, Nokia would have to abide by all relevant royalty-bearing terms in the MFL Agreement, except that whenever there is a conflict between the terms of this Agreement (and, if applicable, the Related Agreements) and the MFL Agreement, the terms of this Agreement (and, if applicable, the Related Agreements) shall control to the extent necessary to meet the intent of the parties hereunder.
D.
The procedure for applying Nokia’s MFL rights shall be as follows:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Question? Can we now tell NOK our 3g license is triggered? What I can't remember is if we know whether the NOK 3g license will allow a major contender to trigger it or if it has to be LU, S/ERicy and or MOT. At one time, I thought the answer was a major player. Then, if I recall, the arb. panel quoted the 2g triggers as LU, MOT and ERICY only. So, do we actually know if the NOK 3g license is the same as the 2g?
AI
