Replies to post #118514 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Hardball]

Loop, correct me if I'm wrong but NOK not only submitted to the arbitration but they're the ones who ASKED for it? And so far as we know didn't object to the authority of the tribunal along the way (waiver, estoppel, laches) so this is all bs by them? Desperation? A negotiating ploy IMHO

Also the message this sends is that they do not arbitrate or deal in good faith and that can't be a good message in an industry where one NEEDS partners.

I agree that this is likely to go away. I think it very significant that they haven't filed an actual appeal yet and time is running.

The notion that they're not going to appeal but will simply refuse to pay is stupid as they WILL be forced to pay one way or another eventually.

[Ghors]

Loop: Good God. Now we may be looking at an appeal of an Order for Specific Performance.

Like you I believe we will prevail on this matter, but it looks like the failure to get a money amount out of the arb is going to cause more delays unless NOK eventually decidees to pay.

This is making my head hurt. I'm going golfing. ARRRRGGGH

IMO Greg

[Learning2vest]

Arbitrations to enforce arbitrations??? Sounds like a dog chasing his tail to me.

This observer does not think the International Court of Arbitration, OR the folks sitting in judgment on IDCC's "arbitration enforcement" action over at New York's Southern District Federal Court would find that to be amusing.

From where this interested observer is watching, this just gets better with every day that passes. I'm thinking, "Go ahead, Nokia. Make my day!" LOL...."tic, toc, time is money on IDCC's top line. Looking forward to seeing the trickle down effect."

[xdx]

loop: I raised the resolution of conflict issue (COURT V. ARBITRATION) as set forth in the PLA. George Bailey responded and I'd like your view on this:
IMO, the PLA is not violated as long as the rules of Arb aren't violated. The rules of arbitration provide for enforcement exactly as IDC is pursuing via New York.

I believe it was olddog who posted that the ICC alone, cannot enforce judgements. However, the court has a mandate to enforce arb awards absent panel member inproprieties.

[laranger]

Why would the ICC leave such a large loose end, after all this time?

Why didn't they request Nokia's sales figures before making their decision?

If there was some reason not to, would they not have advised Nokia to provide them by a certain date, so that IDCC knows what it has won?