Replies to post #354003 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[ziploc_1]

Apple enters this arena with "dirty hands". They are known for their proclivity for refusing to pay license fees even if demonstrably reasonable. They prefer to litigate and use their awesome cash horde to bully license holders into unreasonably low fees. Idcc is a prime example of this. No doubt they will be doing the same thing when their present license agreement with Idcc, which is for a fee of less than 10 cents a phone, expires in two years. Meanwhile they are crying "Help me. I'm being abused".

[BoomandGloom]

Apple's argument makes total sense: (thanks Nicmar for the great post)

Furthermore, Apple argued that royalty payments should not be based on the variable price of products that leverage 3G networking, but rather on a common value determined by the industry standard pricing for basic 3G communications hardware. What Apple is arguing here is that the royalties should not apply to an entire iPhone or iPad, but rather to the basic hardware for 3G wireless radios.

So
iPad 2 is $499 wifi
iPad 2 is $629 3G

3G is now $129,

So $129 must be able to pay for 3G equipment and ALL FRAND patents....

So if IDCC had 5% of FRAND licensed patents, they would get 5% of $129 less manufacturing cost of 3G basebands.

Voila?

Now 10 cents apple is paying per IPhone seems reasonable?