yes......we keep waiting for Spreadtrum to build the right product (including WCDMA?)....
Note that Spreadtrum does not show up in any of IDCC's current reportings, or even their global map of partners....where our other slimchip technology partners do....
but interesting is that they may have made a commitment to pay a minimum royalty.....even if they produce no products....not sure if this is still accurate or if it was restructured later...we recorded (just) $688,000 in revenue from China in 2011...where there is $0 minimum due
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1287950/000119312509141577/d20f.htm#fin92440_2
Commitment to purchase technology
The Company entered into an agreement with a third party vendor in January 2008 to acquire certain technology. An amendment to this agreement was signed in April 2009. In the original agreement and the amendment, the Company committed to pay $10 million over the next seven years for licensing fees and guaranteed royalty payments even if no related products were sold using the acquired technology.
The Company has prepaid $0.5 million license fee to the vendor in 2008. As of December 31, 2008, future minimum payments under this commitment were as follows:
Years Ending
December 31, 2009
$ 1,500,000 License fee
December 31, 2010
1,500,000 License fee
December 31, 2011
—
December 31, 2012
250,000 Minimum royalties
December 31, 2013 and after
6,250,000 Minimum royalties
Total minimum payments
$ 9,500,000
JimLur
Share
Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:06:54 PM
Re: None
Post # of 1707
I asked Janet Point if SPRD was licensed for TDSCDMA and this was her response.
"In 2008 we licensed our mobile Broadband Modem IP high-performance WCDMA/HSDPA/HSUPA baseband designs and protocol stack software for integration into Spreadtrum's dual mode chips. Under the licensing agreement, InterDigital provided complete UMTS 3GPP Release 6 modem technology and customer support.
We do not have a specific agreement relative to TD SCDMA with them. Recall that they are a licensee for the technology rather than the patent portfolio."
but we should note
| 
