Replies to post #96631 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[laranger]

You have said the same thing in the last 15 posts.

BORING!

[jaykayjones]

Corp Buyer; we on Ihub are sitting in the bleachers blindfolded at the game going on between Nok and IDCC. Unsighted, we don't know squat about the real situation on the field. We just react when we hear that one side or the other has scored. Then we Monday-morning quarterback.

You seem to believe that IDCC's management and their high-price, top-drawer legal guns have been negligent. Well, that may be true, but there are a lot of very intelligent people on IDCC's side in this battle with a lot of resources and IMO it's straining credibility to think that silly mistakes are being made and/or negligence is happening except perhaps in haste.

Another explanation for events that we don't fully comprehend is that they are being done deliberately for objectives that're not clear to us because we can't see past our blindfolds. JMO, JK

[alalud]

As a prior defense attorney who gave advice to an insurance company numerous times, I can certainly see your position. My concern now is how long can this matter simmer without losing out on a cause of action based on malpractice by these high priced attorneys? Time is on their side if they can continue to delay any filing of malpractice since I assume the statute of limitations begins running from the time IDCC knew or should have know of their counsels potential negligence. In any event, I appreciate your view and can certainly agree that if they failed to protect against a BAC possibility being raised, malpractice WAS commited. Thanks for your continued posts which I believe do add to our understanding of this stock.