Ronny, no disrespect and you are probably correct but IMO I don't think IDCC will record the revenue unless and until Nokia sends them reports detailing how much is owed to them. Until they do that and admit they owe money, IDCC being as conservative as they are, I don't believe they will record the money as revenue until collectibility is an absolute certainty.
As you are aware, the recognition rules when it comes to contingent revenue is a much higher hurdle than the recognition rules when it comes to contingent liabilities. I firmly believe that IDCC should have reversed the entire valuation allowance related to the deferred tax asset upon the arbitration award and they did not. The hurdle to clear for reversing the reserve for a deferred tax asset allowance is a much easier hurdle to clear because the rules state something to the effect that "when it is more likely than not that you will have taxable income in the future, no reserve is necessary." In their conservative opinion, they still have not reversed the allowance which is a very low hurdle to clear even after the arbitration award. The recognition rules for for contingent assets is much higher and until Nokia admits they owe the money, I can see IDCC considering this money as a continent asset and not booking the revenue.
So I definitely would not be surprised to see a victory and IDCC still not record the revenue until Nokia actually admits they owe the money by either sending a check or sending reports to IDCC. To me it would be opposite their previous conservative nature if they were to book the revenue based on the initial judgement. If Nokia appeals the judges ruling or states that it is their intention to do so, then I doubt very highly that IDCC would record the revenue.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
