Replies to post #60107 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[teecee]

ziploc....sounds like they're building a cage around nokia...ericy for 2g...lu for cdma2000.......the bold move would be to take nokia to arbitration on 3g and try and enforce nec as the trigger....if nec gets any bigger of a lead on 3g...it wont be so bold....food for thought...maybe idc wouldnt be so dissappointed if the arbiters decided ericy was not a trigger for 2g...because then idc can come right back and argue NEC as the trigger for the deal that has ALREADY BEEN SIGNED BY NOKIA FOR 3G

[rmarchma]

Ziplock re Lucent being automatic trigger for Nokia

I agree with this possibility as indicated in the following repost:

Posted by: rmarchma
In reply to: jaykayjones who wrote msg# 50055 Date:11/26/2003 10:04:13 AM
Post #of 60108


Jkjones thanks for the details of the hearing. It is apparent that Judge Lynn understands the heart of the matter in the Nokia royalty dispute from your recap as follows:

..."Judge Lynn did expose a weakness in NOK’s argument; she said that the sealed orders throughout the trial had no effect on the settlement and that NOK’s IPR liability appeared to be controlled by the MFL provision in the 1999 agreement. She didn’t ask why NOK signed in 1999 if they thought that E was winning. But she did say that it appeared to her that - even if all was unsealed, NOK must pay based on the MFL."

It seems that Judge Lynn is well aware that this is really just a contract dispute involving money, which should properly be decided by the arbitration process prescribed in the contract, and not by her court. It is apparent that she senses that Nokia is just using smoke and mirrors in a last-ditch attempt to delay and stall. Unsealing or not unsealing some court documents has no real bearing on the real issues in this royalty dispute. She just doesn't want to do anything that could legally mess-up the arbitration process, which is now underway.

One other point from your post as follows:

..."NOK added that, as things stand, Motorola and Lucent are vulnerable under IDCC’s blanket patents"

Based on this comment, it is apparent that Motorola and Lucent are the other specifically named automatic triggers in the 1999 Nokia contract. Lucent could still serve as an automatic trigger for CDMA2000 and WCDMA infrastructure. Whereas Motorola and Ericy can still serve as the automatic triggers for CDMA2000 and WCDMA handsets, as well as infrastructure.

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1825326