Replies to post #38753 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[glennymo]

my opinion is they are trying to destroy our stock price so they can either buy us or trade us to make up their losses.
so much of that was b.s. the case law they state says any other party to the litigation. it does not say affect anyone else. hell it affects you and me. perhaps we can read the nokia contract under that logic.

[jangis]

the only thing I can think of is NOK is going to try to show the judge that even the insiders knew that the Ericy trial weakened IDCC's patent portfolio and therefore they sold out. This too is a huge stretch but it is the only reason I can come up with

[3GDollars]

ams,

that's very strange Nokia put that in there. I thought of your reasoning, however, can Nokia actually use that threat in a legal court.

come up with is that they are making veiled threats against certain insiders. Perhaps they are saying if you do not agree to a lower rate and or nil payment for 2002, we will state in court that in discussions with the management during the period of 120 days that they made it clear as a bell that they would not pay a penny and challange in court the full amount. With this knowledge the insiders sold and gained large profit at the expense of shareholders.

[spider69]

ams, you might be onto something. Recall the "damage control" cc? Rip or Merritt commented not so secretly that the engineering folks still have a great working relationship (ie mgmt's might not see eye to eye) Maybe one of the lone snoozers is holding up a compromise that would get most everyone happy. Gripe away all of you that feel the need but I think our mgmt mishandled the ERICY settlement cc and now NOK is PO'd that they aired the numbers in public. Additionally they feel stretching this out is worth any gamble involved and that IDCC's track record is to give away the farm when their back is against the wall. Maybe just maybe IDCC is finally standing up and saying the "buck stops here". Somewhere they have to set a precedent for not backing down like the ERICY debacle and maybe this is finally the time. It won't be easy or pleasant but I for one would rather see them give it a sincere try and if they fail, find a buyer that can close deals and enforce patents...

[fredtankos]

AMS:

I think it is going to be very hard to get a judge to open a sealed file or reopen a summary judgment order that both parties to a litigated matter agreed to set aside. I think NOK is just looking for negotiating strength.

That part of the NOK brief that you mention (insider sales) is most troubling to me because it appears NOK is threatening IDCC management that NOK will pull out all the stops, and that this license negotiation could turn into a very dirty deal.

A lot of mud slinging will hurt IDCC much more than NOK, and could result in shareholder action against IDCC management (if not already under consideration) (IMO).

[GAB]

Unprofessional, slanderous and probably impossible to prove on Nokia's part. Is this the way that disputes are handled in Europe, with petulance. I propose a wild west shootout at high noon on 8/25. Harry vs Jorma.

[Corp_Buyer]

Nok mention of insider sales was not a threat IMO. Rather, Nok mentioned the fact of insider sales after the share price runup to support their argument about the impact of NOK on IDCC and that the Nok impact was touted even before the Ericy settlement was explained in the settlement PR. It is in support of their argument that NOK was affected by the Ericy settlement so Nok should have access to the case file, since IDCC themselves chose to tout the Nok affect even before talking about the Ericy result in the settlement PR.

In other words, Nok are saying that the Nok impact on IDCC was more important than the Ericy settlement and NOK IMPLIES that there was a pump and dump going on by management. This is an outrageous implication since at that time there was no reason to think that NOK would not pay in full per the license.

IMO, IDCC disclosed the Nok impact so blatantly precisely to send the signal that Nok owed a certain amount and this amount is expected and it is NOT open to negotiation. Good for management. They will continue to take a hard line as they should. As a shareholder, I am glad IDCC did NOT discount the amount owed and that they stated it publically up front.

The disparaging implications by Nok are payback for boxing them in. I am glad Nok is boxed in.

Having read the Nok filing today, I am more confident than I was yesterday that IDCC will WIN this dispute with Nok.

Regards,
Corp_Buyer

[JimLur]

Ams , Nokia mentioned the insider sales because IMO they are going for the kill. It don’t take a rocket scientist to figure out IDCC gave ERICY a great rate on infrastructure in exchange for a good handset rate. The ERICY/Sony joint venture didn’t sell that many handsets last year and most probably will continue to lose market share to Nokia,Samsung,NEC ,Sharp and Kyocera.

The handset turnover is huge and will continue to be huge year after year and if IDCC brings Nokia and Samsung into the fold the rest is a no brainer.

Nokia now realizes they should have established their own rate rather than let ERICY be the triggering event.

IMO they have hopes that their comments will spark a SEC investigation regarding IDCC insider sales with the hope it will drive down the price of the shares.

They know this would cause shareholder as well as institutional problems which may lead to bartering a better rate for them.

IMO at this time individual investors as well as institutions need to make a decision.

If you think management sold their shares legally than hang in there and if you believe Nokia’s crap then sell and buy Nokia.