Found this article on topic:
It seems IDCC has more than corrupt cartel to deal with in regards to enforcement of patents at ITC.
Now the Federal Trade Commission, which is already investigating Google on allegations of antitrust violations, plans to weigh in. In its statutory role as adviser to the International Trade Commission, the FTC is likely to file an opinion that import bans should be avoided in cases involving standards-essential patents, lest that harm innovation, according to a person familiar with the FTC's thinking. If the advice is heeded, Google could lose some of the negotiating leverage that Motorola's patents were supposed to provide.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577444492476769520.html?mod=ITP_moneyandinvesting_6#articleTabs%3Darticle
How can standards-essential patents be monetized/enforced? Who defines innovation and specifically, what inhibits innovators? Yikes, it will probably be defined by politicians, which explains Google's huge DC lobbying presence. Guess IDCC needs to reallocate their lawyers fees to lobbyist.
It appears to me that in regards to 2G-3G the rate IDCC gave Apple is what all others will be held to when/if arbitration is used to define the contract. Haven't we already been down this path numerous times? Which means the legal game plan is at best flawed and possibly insane according to Einstein's definition "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results."
Hope somehow sanity is restored and the hard work the engineers have completed can be monetized in the near future.
| 