Replies to post #7150 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[revlis]

loophole,

The biggest difference between February 2002 and February 2003 is that in February 2002, there was no trial date.



Jerry

[Mooseo1]

Great post Loop!

But if I may add. The timing was beyond our control do to many factors and it could have turned out very differently had the pieces fell together. But thats part of investing and we have many of the same reasons to remain positive IMO. IDCC is not going away and neither is the potential for some big time up side.

Best to ya!

Moose

[TFWG]

Loop, If there was ever a post to recommend, you just wrote it! Great clarity. Everyone should read this post, print it, and read it again everyday.

Regards,

Bob

[ziploc_1]

Loop, excellent post. My take on the disappointing result of the Samsung arbitration was that the 39 million dollar payoff from Nokia was not really for engineering work, nor for royalties but mostly consideration for IDCC not filing an infringement suit at the time. If the arbitrator has seen it that way, he might not have used the MFL clause against IDCC. As a lawyer, do you know whether IDCC could have structured the deal so as to make it plain that this was really to forestall a lawsuit more than to make NOK a licensee. Or do you perhaps not agree with my thinking on this? At any rate it was tough for IDCC, having told the world that NOK was a licensee to then have to convince the arbitrator that NOK was not a licensee.