Replies to post #38091 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Learning2vest]

sjr, esq - been reading the dialogue on arbitration and wanted to comment that IMO you guys have been in agreement for awhile now without acknowledging it. The key point seems to be that everything will be decided by the arbitration panel. Not Nokia or the courts, and not InterDigital.

If I'm understanding how binding arbitration(i.e., as defined in a legal contract between two parties) is supposed to work, both parties are going to do pretty much what the arbitration panel tells them to do. If the arbitration panel decides to grant Nokia's request for document access, that same arbitration panel could even direct InterDigital to assist in that effort. On the other hand, if the arbitration panel decides that they do not need for Nokia to have access to additional documents, then IMO Nokia is wasting it's time with the courts. It appears that the arbitration process trumps the legal process, and the arbitration panel will control how things proceed as defined under the terms of the contract between Nokia and InterDigital.

[ziploc_1]

Nok is not interested in Ericy court case. This case dealt with using Idcc patents which Ericy has decided to pay for. What NOK really wants is information as to how the rates that Ericy agreed to pay Idcc were reached. They would like to find evidence that there was collusion between the two against them. Such evidence would not be found in court papers but in the direct negotiations between Idcc and Ericy. These negotiations are probably not filed with the court and are doubtless covered by confidentiality clauses and would require the consent of BOTH Idcc and Ericy to be revealed. Ericy is not a party to the Nok-Idcc arbitration proceedings and would probably balk at this. Idcc would not have the option of opening up these papers, assuming they exist at all. Recently we have seen QCOM sue TI for revealing confidential information and attempt to get their whole agreement nullified because of this infraction.