Jim_Charts, dynamite post partner! Reading that summary was a great way to start the day. Let me be the first to welcome you to the "IDCC Investor's Club"!
Mean that sincerely because seeing you show that kind of depth sure blows away any silly notion that I ever had about you "trading" IDCC based on just the T/A. Bet you have a better grasp of the underlying situation here than 99% of the folks out there moving those "market indicators".
Guessing you see having that level of understanding, AND your decision to hold long for the potential that research appears to support, as nothing more than a "trader's edge". Gotta say that seeing somebody that I have come to respect as a serious "player" effectively become an "investor" holding IDCC for expected value potential is mighty encouraging.
A more relevant thought that came to mind while reading your ref post was the fact that Nokia has also protested that the arbitration is "only about 2G". Seeing that kind of concern appear in Nokia's pre-emptive strike against IDCC's 3G IPR back in January caught my attention. Been wondering about that since then along with why Nokia felt the need to launch an attack on IDCC's 3G a full 2 years before their contract expired???
Hmmm.....Nokia's legal counsel for that ICC arbitration probably needed to brief management before the evidentiary hearing opened Jan 17. Did somebody get nervous and jerky about a possibility that Nokia's entire 1999 contract with InterDigital could get opened up in that hearing?
What would get laid on the table for the panel's consideration if that happened? Like you said, Nokia paid IDCC ~$31 million for 2G IPR usage prior to 2002 under the 2G section of that contract, AND Nokia paid IDCC something like ~$58 million for WTDD development services under another section of that same contract.
This arb panel was initially chartered only to resolve issues relating to the setion of that contract defining "2G after 2002"(and apparently that is what got defined within their terms of reference way back when), but what have they learned in the past few years? IMO there is no doubt that they have Nokia's entire contract in their hands, AND that IDCC's legal counsel has pointed out where things stand on all aspects of the relationship with Nokia since entering that contract agreement.
Seems like that IDCC briefing would go something like "Section 1 defining Nokia's 2G terms and conditions was "paid up" thru phase one and the settlement with Ericsson and SNE "triggered" phase two payments which you have under consideration; Section 2 defining Nokia's WTDD development terms and conditions was completed and paid for yada/yada.., Section 3 defining Nokia's 3G terms and conditions("IMO" from here on) will be triggered by the completion of a license with Ericsson and SNE, which by this covenant, is contingent only on your finding here that they qualify as a valid trigger under the contract." Oh yeah!
Have enjoyed speculating on that "Section 3" theory for a few months now. Like the way it would explain the timing of Nokia's "too early" attack on 3G, the fact that Nokia claimed that the current arb was "NOT ABOUT 3G" in filing that complaint, and maybe even the extended time period between completing the evidentiary hearing in January and waiting until May 31 ro render a Final Award notification.
Gotta be a lot of things going on behind the scenes that we don't know about(i.e., like whatever it was that got Howard and Rip bounced out a few weeks ago). It would be mighty sweet to learn next week that wrapping up Nokia's "Section 3" issues was one of those things.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
