You're getting desperate and emotional again. One can always tell by the way you distort what I say to fit that grudge fight in your head. I distinctly said that my ongoing assessment of the litigation risks in IDCC informs my profitable trades, but it's not the only factor, obviously. Seasonality is another factor. The improving economy is yet another, but like I'm going to belabor the obvious with a lightweight like you.
Second, it's good that you bought up the 1995 IDCC vs Motorola loss because I can now step over your useless carcass and trivialities to point out that 1996/1997 validation of IDCC's TDMA patents in Germany and Sweden as well as the 1999 revalidation of its TDMA patents at the US Patent Office.
Are those validations and revalidations good enough to repair the damage of the 1995 Motorola loss? That's for a jury to decide in a trial environment markedly different from the 1995 trial environment.
For one thing, the Markman proceeding is now an integral part of the patent infringement trial. The 1995 Motorola case didn't have a Markman proceeding. For another thing, the appeal court and the district courts now have the benefit of several US Supreme Court rulings (most recently, Festo) to guide their own rulings related to findings of law and findings of fact. In particular. the post-GATT (1994) boundaries between literal infringement and infringement under the doctrine of equivalents in the US patent system have been more clearly defined.
Do those legal developments mean that IDCC is assured of a win this time around? Again, wrong question. The fact that IDCC is even going to get its day in court again over its TDMA patents after the 1995 Motorola loss is the basis of measured optimism, a concept apparently alien to a wild-eyed QCOM cheerleader like you who apparently doesn't know how to construct hedges. Just buy and hold and keep on watching that QCOM vs the rest of the world soap opera in your head, eh?
The easily verifiable fact of the matter is that IDCC has collected more than $400M in royalties since 1993 with the bulk of royalties coming in after the 1995 Motorola loss and more than $300M coming in after the 1996/1997 revalidation of IDCC's TDMA patents in Germany and Sweden. Indirectly, that gives you an idea of what other legal departments think of IDCC's patent portfolio AFTER the 1995 Motorola loss.
The fashionable thing for a lightweight like you to say is that IDCC got paid to go away. Predictable, as they say. That $400M in collected royalties, however translate to more than $8/share in cumulative royalties. For some perspective, the equivalent royalty number for QCOM to hit $8/share in cumulative royalties is $4+B.
I could go on, but I think this type of risk assessment is already way over the head of a cheerleader like you who sees the world in black, white and a token shade of gray.
LOL. |
