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

Re: Has there been a decision on the summary judgement in the ITC case?

By: sonic22 in IDCC | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 27 Jul 12 12:21 AM | 287 view(s)
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications
Msg. 45699 of 48237
(This msg. is a reply to 45696 by zzfan)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Loop,

Defintely agree on the legal fees. At this point im willing to wait out this ITC case. If they again come up empty with no violation it really will be time to throw in the towel with them. At least for me. I'm hoping we get the staff to side with us before the hearing and can settle but if the staff rules against us I will be very concerned going into the hearing.




» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Has there been a decision on the summary judgement in the ITC case?
By: zzfan
in IDCC
Thu, 26 Jul 12 11:37 PM
Msg. 45696 of 48237

Judges do not have to rule on motions for summary determinations. Thus, there is no timeline.

These lawyers billed us 14,800,000 dollars last quarter. At an average of 400/hr, it would take 37,000 hours to amass this bill. A good billing quarter for a lawyer is 600 hours. This means that 61 lawyers worked exclusively on IDCC.

As they say, c'mon man. IDCC just reads them and pays them. This number begs for an audit. This is one of the reasons for the 7 cent miss and the drop in share price today.

The elephant is still in the room and AAPL is using their IDCC license against Samsung to set a FRAND rate. IDCC should volunteer to testify in the APPL/SAMSUNG case to refute that the amount being paid by AAPL has anything to do with FRAND. In fact, they should admit it is a freak as a result of misunderstanding. If IDCC remains silent, WM may be written up in the history books as the person who drove royalty rates to the bottom for 3g.

Time is of the essence for IDCC to take some offensive with AAPL. The license is killing renewals for 3g and is killing new licensing for 3g. IDCC simply cannot afford to allow the existing 3g rate with APPL to be declared a benchmark in a FRAND case in the wireless sector. The manufacturers do not care because they are making profit from the sale of their products. IDCC and NPE's should have great concern because they make nothing until licensing is in place.

Perhaops IDCC does not care and plans to sell its entire patent portfolio over the next few years. If so, so be it. However, if it does, waisting millions of dollars at the ITC which does not allow recovery of attorney fees, seems contra to such a plan where the end result encumbers the portfolio via licensing. One way or the other, the APPL problem must be fixed in some form or fashion.

The same old rhetoric used in the Nok war about doing it right is not going to work in the upcoming AAPL and Samsung battles. We have been chasing Nok for 3g for over 6 years now. We need a FRAND rate determination asap via the fastest way and venue if it means taking our talents to Germany while we are waiting on the US justice system to issue a final ruiling.

MO
loop


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