Replies to post #164438 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[rmarchma]

Corp_Buyer re 3G provision in Nokia/Samsung licenses you asked:

....."But, if Sam gets the original Nok 3G license and does not follow Nok into the recent settlement, so the original Nok 3G terms apply to Sam, then what does that mean to Sam if there is no trigger event and their 3G license expires with no royalty obligation? "

The paid-up provision only applies to 2G at the end of 2006, not to 3G. Nokia received the paid-up provision for 2G at the end of 2006, as the result of that provision being given to Ericy and SE in their triggering licenses. However, IDCC has granted NO licensee a fully paid-up provision on 3G.

Had the Nokia license continued in effect through 2006, and no triggering company licensed with IDCC for 3G by the end of 2006, then Nokia would not have to pay anything for 3G during the Phase 2 license period 2002-2006. However they would have become unlicensed for 3G after 2006, but not paid-up for 3G. Therefore they could have been sued by IDCC for 3G infringement, if they did not renew the license for 3G. This same thing would apply to Samsung, if they happen to receive Nokia's 3G provisions under the now terminated license agreement.

[j70k]

Corp I don't think that nok's 3g had a time provision per se-only a trigger event. If IDCC can't license a trigger at some point, then really we are talking a whole different ballgame regarding our patent strength. My feeling is that all this conjecture will be negotiated as usual and that the agreement by IDCC not to sue for infringement is in some way connected to what nok is trying to accomplish with qcom. Agreements henceforth will be of a different nature and I think that the bottom line for IDCC is to free itself once and for all from triggers and mfl. JMHO