Replies to post #101897 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Learning2vest]

Great stuff Loop. "Another shot right down the middle" to use a golfing metaphor. Given your very helpful insight of what is actually going on at IDCC these days, it puzzles me why some folks continue to belly ache and bluster week after week about whatever negative issue they can dig up. Most of the time it's the same ones over and over! Go figure..........???

Hmmmmmm....(~~light comes on somewhere in the dim halls of this old mind~~)

News flash: This is an IDCC "INVESTORS" forum.
All folks looking for a place to conduct political campaigns or to grind some other axe please take another look at the opening comments made by this board's moderator(copied below);
.............................................................................................

"Welcome to the InterDigital Communications Company investors discussion.

This Board is an online community in which people of good will can come to seek and find all useful information and the best reasoned speculation about IDCC. It is also a forum in which to explore relevant industry information that may contribute to understanding IDCC, including its current and future stock value."

...................................................................................................

I read that to mean this forum is for folks looking for help in making their own personal decisions to "buy, hold, or sell" shares of IDCC. See the parts about folks of "good will" sharing "useful information" and "reasoned speculations". That is how this respectful participant understands JimLur's "rules of this road".

I do NOT see anything that makes it "OK" for some to use this forum as bulletin board for their political campaigns. In fact, the way I'm reading those guidelines some of that endless political stuff has to be off-limits.

[rmarchma]

Loop re Motorola and Ericy lawsuits you said:

...."1. Has managed to license triggering companies for 2g on the basis of a few patent claims that survived the Mot slaughter only because of a procedural glitch on the part of the Mot lawyers. In fact, of those 11 surviving claims, some were revalidated and still got poured out by Judge Sanders on the basis of no infringement. These same claims were held not to infringe the Mot products after the appeal. This alone should put him in the top of the class because he and his "cronies" took a knife to 9mm shootout and came out alive with added shareholder value. Further, as a result, IDCC with its little knife clutched in its hand is awaiting arbitration decisions against two AK 47 carriers."

I think that you are getting the Motorola and the Ericy lawsuits very mixed-up in your thinking and conclusions. I really can't recall the different patents involved in the Motorola lawsuit, but I don't think that any of the patents involved in Motorola were used in the Ericy lawsuit. The Ericy lawsuit involved 11 claims in 6 different patents from those litigated in Motorola, I believe. Therefore these 11 claims used in the Ericy lawsuit were not surviving claims from the Motorola fiasco, if I am correct.

The six patents involved in the Ericy lawsuit were the '089, five claims from the '194 patent, '358, '705, '420 and the '450. Two of these six patents had been revalidated by the US Patent Office. However, I don't think that either revalidated patent used in Ericy was one of the ones used in Motorola. I think IDCC did get one of the appealed patents in Motorola revalidated, but they did not use that one in the Ericy lawsuit.

If I am incorrect about the patents in Ericy not being the same as those in Motorola, I hope someone will provide correction. However if I am right on this point, then there is no way that your following statements are correct:

..."Has managed to license triggering companies for 2g on the basis of a few patent claims that survived the Mot slaughter....In fact, of those 11 surviving claims, some were revalidated and still got poured out by Judge Sanders on the basis of no infringement. These same claims were held not to infringe the Mot products after the appeal."

[Hardball]

Loop: Thanks for Your Reply

BUT, without parsing each of your statements one by one, the thing that is important is the results of the arbitration with NOK.

Standards committees don't mean squat unless they produce something for the bottom line. In fact, if they don't produce something for the bottom line, they cost us money.

I don't understand #3 at all. What "cronies" ; could you expand a bit?

Taking LU to task? Well, we'll see what happens with that.

Surviving the SEC audit? Well I expect that companies SHOULD be doing the right thing notwithstanding the many who aren't--I'm NOT invested in Tyco WCOm Enron Adelphia Rite Aid AIG etc.

And much of what you say is more fluff than substance.

It is the bottom line that matters, is the company going to score big or not?

I think THAT is what long term investors are waiting for (short termers too) THAT is what all the hype has been about and the big payday is something we're all still waiting for.

I'm IN for the long run, for better or worse I AM married to this investment and a divorce would be too costly.

As I have said before, I'm frustrated with lots of hype and not much substance to back it up; frustrated with the big payday always being deferred; upset about the ERICY settlement--at the time I thought it would trigger the dominoes to fall but instead I think it was widely perceived as signalling weakness not strength--I was wrong to think it showed strength.

So yes I AM waiting for the Arb ruling. Just like we were waiting for the ERICY outcome. But it has proven to be like waiting for godot.

I share the hopes and dreams of those who are long this stock.

Anticipation it is making me wait. Patience has not been rewarded thus far; perhaps it will be in the (near) future and that would prove that patience IS a virtue.

Thanks for your post.