« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: rak.

By: Rakitno in IDCC | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 08 Jun 12 1:38 AM | 346 view(s)
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications
Msg. 45389 of 48237
(This msg. is a reply to 45388 by teecee)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

No one should be surprised by the healthy rate. It probably was and is likely comparable to Samsungs, LG and even RIMM, if not the same ... the difference being some are fixed and tied to volume projections and RIMM's, NEC etc. is based upon actual sales. One has a fixed variable for sales volumes the others not fixed.

So I don't get how a company can argue they want the effective rate, or anyone elses effective rate like Apple, in order to get it ... Like I said, an effective rate in a fixed contract is like snowflakes, no two will be alike ... I know they will try anything in negotiations, if they are in fact doing just that.

It just seems to be the perception now that the Apple agreeement is the boogieman, yet Merritt seems to be saying it is not true when you know what is in it.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
rak.
By: teecee
in IDCC
Fri, 08 Jun 12 1:06 AM
Msg. 45388 of 48237

according to Bm today...LG has never ever brought up arbitration in their negotiations w/ idc....and really have no desire to do so...when you fight a case...you use every possible defense...when you file your response...he said the whole arb thing is BS..and it really wont effect the outcome...he also said the contract is available for public viewing...and that we should read it ourselves as evidence of the finality of the contract...also i asked him if the apppl contract could be a detriment if forced to arb...he said the initial rate was actually very healthy the way the contract was written...and we know the rest


« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next