Eneerg, terrific post and much appreciated. Have to confess that although i often post opinions on things with what appears to be confidence, what i'm really doing a lot of the time is sticking my neck way out in hopes that we all learn something from the discussion that follows. My thought is that the best way to get meaningful collaboration going on a specific topic is for somebody to state a position, and then see what sticks after others comment.
Lot's of times i end up wondering whether i actually got something right, or if it was so far out in left field that nobody wants to touch it??? LOL! Your ref post not only helps build confidence that our current expectations for IDCC's 3G licensing program are realistic(which is what i was looking for in my posts on the topic), you expanded the discussion to include several aspects i had not considered. Rates and dates for 2G narrowband CDMA products could indeed be one of the major sticking points that have caused Nokia(and Samsung) to pursue arbitration. Maybe "the" sticking point in fact.
Hmmm.......gotta noodle on that awhile. First reaction is that it's big enough to set Nokia off just by itself, it would explain why Samsung joined the dispute, and it appears to add perspective regarding both indemnification and the Lucent action. Hope you post your opinions more often. Good stuff IMO.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
