Replies to post #266791 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[fitzy321]

dmiller go have a beer
If you are so smart why are you still hanging around??
fitzy321

[SSALNER]

dmiller,

best you go to the movies now. No need to shat on the folks that have already been shat on. Have a little class.

[nicmar]

Of all the patents Idcc has it's very hard to believe idcc has no essential patents that apply to the standard. Anybody have any idea what this will mean regarding renewals? No matter what kind of spin is put on this one, it is a devastating blow to all long time idcc shareholder, many of us that don't have the time to let this drag out another 5 years.

In regard to your post dmiller. I quite agree, but there will be no such luck as he will have some other kind of paper soaked suit with some other alj other than Luckern with the matches and the lighter. Hope there weren't too many investors that got creamed.

[my3sons87]

Dmiller, we got a split verdict. No infringement of the patents based on the ALJ's claim construction. But the patents all stood the validity test, even the 579 patent against Nokia's Lucas materials. To stand that onslaught and walk away with valid patents is good in and of itself. Would I have liked to have a finding of patent infringement? Yes. We didn't get it and that is that. But Nokia still knows that IDCC has other patents in hand.

Is a patent that has an accepted standards solution infringed by virtue of the fact that is is in the standard. It is possible the ALJ wanted the full commission to make the decision, as he kept saying he wanted the record complete when it went to the commission.

[my3sons87]

Dmiller, we got a split verdict. No infringement of the patents based on the ALJ's claim construction. But the patents all stood the validity test, even the 579 patent against Nokia's Lucas materials. To stand that onslaught and walk away with valid patents is good in and of itself. Would I have liked to have a finding of patent infringement? Yes. We didn't get it and that is that. But Nokia still knows that IDCC has other patents in hand.

Is a patent that has an accepted standards solution infringed by virtue of the fact that is is in the standard. It is possible the ALJ wanted the full commission to make the decision, as he kept saying he wanted the record complete when it went to the commission.