InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[0nceinalifetime]

Mschere, regarding the 10K excerpt you provided, it's very important to look at the exact language. I really like to rely upon SEC filings because the company can be held to them and they are a primary source of ammunition for shareholders should we find out that things are not as we have been led to believe. In other words, the company is (or should be) very specific about how they word things of importance. In your example the company said:

"Based on these limitations, the Siemens and the Qualcomm agreements do not provide a license under all the ITC patents or IPR Holdings Patents which we believe to be essential to 3G, including CDMA 2000, or all of the inventions which we believe will be essential and which are contained in pending patent applications."

That word "or" is very important to a lawyer or anyone who understands how such language is interpreted in a court of law. Taking this into account I don't believe the sentence says what you think it does. It's not a very well-written sentence and it is somewhat complex but two things are certain:

1) If the word "or" (in bold) was changed to "and" then the sentence would say what you believe it already says.

2) By changing "or" to "and" the entire meaning of the sentence is changed.

Something to consider before interpreting the specific parts of the 10K that are most important to IDCC's future value in a way that favors IDCC's position in the world of IPR. Just remember, a court of law knows all about the differences between "and" and "or". I have to believe the lawyers at IDCC understand this also.

Once