The technology solutions arbitration with "Intel", allegedly ...
Have I missed where what is being arbitrated, specifically, has been discussed in a past CC? Are the funds that IDCC is receiving, and which are being deferred, non-refundable? Is the reason why IDCC is not recognizing the revenue because they have not agreed on a new rate and "Intel" is paying IDCC the old rate based upon, what IDCC thinks, is a superseded contract?
Therefore what is being arbitrated, is not whether Intel has an obligation to pay, but are instead arbitrating the "actual" amount. IDCC thinks it should be more, Intel thinks it should be what it was and hence are continuing to pay.
I can't see how anyone would pay IDCC if they do not think they are using their technology, so why would anyone who thinks that be paying any cash? IDCC is not recognizing the revenue because they do not have a formal contract and therefore does not meet the rev rec guidance in generally accepted accounting principles.
???
| 