Replies to post #343506 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Rational Investor]

Yes, I'm a paid lobbyist for Intel, Nokia and Apple. That's why I spend time on this board to try to influence FRAND rates.

I have not seen you once post positively on anything that could put the value of IDCC higher in the future. Only ever trying to talk IDCC and their value of their patents or the rates they could charge down.

And, YES, the market do set FRAND rates. If the majority of companies are willing to pay 3% rates to Qualcomm and 5% to Microsoft, then that is deemed Fair and Reasonable. Your arguments of no need for litigation are noble, but in practice these companies like Nokia and Microsoft don't want to pay, and it forced a small company like IDCC into litigation, pushing up their costs, therefore the rate they can charge to recover their costs and risks.

[olddog967]

gabeh; In regard to your statement that no one forces a company to submit a patent for inclusion in a standard, companies do not submit patents for inclusion in a standard, they submit technical proposals which may be covered by a patent. Second, and more important, since most telecom industry related companies are members of ETSI, and participate in the standard setting process they are required to declare any patents they have that are essential to the standard. Non declaration of a patent could lead to that patent being thrown out in any infringement action.

From ETSI's IPR Policy

4 Disclosure of IPRs
4.1 Subject to Clause 4.2 below, each MEMBER shall use its reasonable endeavours, in particular during the development of a STANDARD or TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION where it participates, to inform ETSI of ESSENTIAL IPRs in a timely fashion. In particular, a MEMBER
submitting a technical proposal for a STANDARD or TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION shall, on a bona fide basis, draw the attention of ETSI to any of that MEMBER's IPR which might be ESSENTIAL if that proposal is adopted.