Replies to post #134509 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[laranger]

Dave.

Interesting comment about the investment community.

Do they want this decision in private?

We certainly don't want to embarrass Jorma in front of Wall Streeters. But it's a little strange that Nokia is finally concerned about what Wall Street might think about a second loss on the ICC ruling.

If they lose this round, will that stop them from going to the next level, and losing for a third time?

These guys are getting more than a little disgusting!

[twelvebees]

Dave, Did I understand that My3sons in his cheap suit looked like a member of the investment community? Or, were there attendees in the courtroom in expensive suits and Gucci shoes that impressed the Nokia lawyers that the investment community was in attendance. The Nokia lawyers may have monitored this board and learned that we had a crack team of investors observing them and the judge.

[songioan]

Investment community, Of course the THEIF got caught and does not want to have the verdict rendered in public. I suggest that the verdict would be written in in Finnish so that the Wall Street wouldn’t understand. I will volunteer to pay for the translation fee!

[Hardball]

DaveDavis/MTS:Thanks. Those comments would SEEM to bode well for us.

But the basis for the appeal was absurd in the first place--especially given the VERY narrow grounds under the Arbitration Act for appeal.

One thing that concerns me is that I recall NOK saying after the arb decision that they were (I'm paraphrasing from memory) "considering all their options including not paying."

And (If I recall correctly) that was in response to whether they'd appeal or WHAT they'd do.

I seem to remember them making it clear that in addition to "legal remedies" they were just considering stiffing us, period.

The notion that their appeal is based in large part on the fact that ONE arbitrator of three dissented is almost too ridiciulous to comprehend! Given that the arbs work where each side picks one and agree on a neutral, it is NOT at all uncommon to see one dissenter in three member panel arb decisions. I can't recall a single example of one that was overturned on that basis--and there certainly are no grounds under the arbitration act that provide for appellate relief on the grounds that the panel wasn't unanimous absent fraud etc.

This is was always has been and always will be a desperate stalling effort though it is hard to imagine what they have to gain, and given interest, delay damages and possible sanctions, they sure do have a lot to lose. By getting to this point, they would seem to have lost any leverage in negotiations they might have had to settle the case for less than the full award prior to now.

But nothing will stop them from appealing further if their strategy is simply delay, which it seems to be, delay for delay's sake.

Thanks for posting the MTS update. Query: who or what is MTS and where is this from?

Thanks!