Replies to post #39590 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Corp_Buyer]

The Nok motion strongly implied that the adverse rulings against Idcc WERE in fact vacated (by mutual request of the parties), otherwise, Nok would not need to complain about that fact.

It seems certain that the adverse ruling was vacated. Therefore, it has no weight whatsoever, right? In any case, the existance of standards, the fact that Ericy and others have licensed with Idcc for 2G, give me comfort that Nok is also infringing and they also must license for 2G.

I further reason that Nok certainly knows they must license with IDCC for 2G and therefore this entire dispute is not leading to a 2g patent infringement litigation, but rather it is tactical in an effort to get better 2G and/or 3G rates from Idcc.

Given the looming 3G imperative and Nok's need to now take control of their IPR costs rather than let others (such as Ericy, Mot, a judge or arbitrators) determine their licensing rates, it seems logical that Nok would prefer to set their own rates via hardball negotiation.

Your thoughts on this reasoning?

Regards,
Corp_Buyer

[ziploc_1]

Sjratty:

Isn't it quite likely that Idcc alleged infingement by Ericy not only on many claims that were central to their case but also on some peripheral claims that might be less sustainable . If this were the case then it would follow that the rejected claims were likely to have been in the more questionable group to begin with. This would be in line with Idcc's assertion that they were in good shape after the partial summary judgements.