Thanks for posting that Greed, I find it very interesting:
"Compensation: Pay Per New
To foster innovation, you must reward innovation. Most of the companies on our list do so with cash or stock options for specific inventions. Consider the incentive program at InterDigital Communications Corp., which develops advanced wireless technologies. Employees who come up with a patentable invention get more than 2,000 options: one-third vest when the patent is filed, two-thirds when it's granted. There's also an Inventors' Dinner for those who've filed for or have been awarded patents that year. The dinner recognizes -- with cash awards -- the individual or team named as inventor on the year's most valuable patent, the person named as inventor on the most patents, and employees who've reached certain "plateaus" (by being named inventor on 5, 10, or 15 patents, say). Cash awards start at less than $1,000 and grow with the number of patents. The program was created to encourage "an atmosphere of collegial competition," says patent lawyer Kimberly Chotkowski. It's worked. In 2001, InterDigital applied for 256 patents, five times the number it applied for in 1999."
IMO, this is the crux of the problem at IDCC. The lawyers who run the company put too much emphasis on the number of patents and not enough emphasis on making sure the patents are relevant to modern communication systems. As long as the Patent Office actually issues the patent, that's good enough for them to count it. To me it appears as if management is encouraging the mass filing of patents and they will figure out later how to try to leverage those into payments from others.
Once