Nokia's InterDigital PR Statement ...
... is short and sweet with no mention of 3G license negotiation.
>> Nokia and InterDigital Resolve Contract Dispute
Nokia Press Relese
Espoo, Finland
April 28, 2006
tinyurl.com
Nokia and InterDigital have resolved their contract dispute over the patent license agreement originally signed in 1999. The parties had a dispute regarding the impact to Nokia of InterDigital's licenses with Ericsson and Sony-Ericsson.
The settlements resolve the legal disputes related to 2G products. Under the settlement agreements, Nokia obtains a fully paid-up, perpetual, irrevocable license to all of InterDigital's current patent portfolio, and any patents InterDigital may later acquire, for purposes of making or selling 2G products, including handsets and infrastructure.
The settlements also resolve disputes related to all Nokia products up to the agreement date. "Our prior contract agreement required us to respect the settlements that Ericsson and Sony-Ericsson entered in 2003, but there was a dispute about the impact those other settlements should have on Nokia, " said Ilkka Rahnasto, Vice President, Intellectual Property Rights, Nokia. "This case demonstrates that legal disputes are sometimes necessary in order to lower unrealistic demands".
The USD$253 million payment required under the settlement is in line with Nokia's earlier provisions. <<
This is Nokia's statement of provision in §8.A.7 from the 228 page 2005 Nokia 20-F filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2006 ...
>> In 1999, Nokia entered into a license agreement with InterDigital Technology Corporation ("IDT") for certain technology. The license provided for a fixed royalty payment through 2001 and most favored licensee treatment from 2002 through 2006. The patents being licensed were subject to litigation by other manufacturers. In March 2003, IDT settled patent litigation with Ericsson and Sony-Ericsson and announced that it intended to apply the settlement royalty rates to Nokia under the most favored licensee provision. After failed attempts at negotiating a settlement, Nokia filed an arbitration demand seeking access to withheld information necessary to an evaluation of the matter. IDT responded with a counterclaim seeking to apply the Ericsson and Sony-Ericsson licenses to Nokia. An arbitration hearing was completed in January 2005 and an award ("Award") was issued by two of the three arbitrators in July 2005. The Award was accompanied by a lengthy dissent from the third arbitrator. In the Award, which Nokia believes was internally inconsistent, the majority generally set royalty rates that IDT has publicly contended imposes $232 to $252 million in royalty obligations on Nokia for the period of 2002 through 2006. Nokia disputes this calculation. Immediately after the Award was issued, IDT filed a demand with a federal district court in New York to confirm the Award. Nokia asked the same federal court to vacate the Award in its entirety under applicable law. On December 28, 2005, the federal district court issued an order confirming the Award and denying Nokia's motion to vacate. Two days prior to the issuance of the federal district court's order, IDT announced its intention to invoke the dispute resolution mechanisms under the parties' 1999 agreement with regard to Nokia's royalty reporting and payment obligations under the Award. In late January, Nokia filed a notice of appeal of the federal district court's order, and a schedule for briefing those matters to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is in place. In addition, the parties have engaged in continued settlement discussions in an effort to resolve issues that are in dispute. Nokia continues to believe that the Award should be vacated under applicable law and is currently evaluating its options with regard to both the appeal process and IDT's request for further dispute resolution proceedings under the parties' agreement. <<
nokia.com
That note above is (I believe) reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheets on page 141 (F-3) and the line item of €266 million "capital and reserves attributable to equity holders of the parent" under Shareholders’ Equity And Liabilities.
While their IP strategies and postures in the last decade were decidedly defensive, today the strategies of patent rich Nokia and Ericsson (and increasingly Siemens) are also decidedly offensive, and actually Ericsson who brought Ericsson v. QUALCOMM in 1996, shifted gears faster than Nokia (or Siemens). A worthwhile book on the subject that gives insight into Nokia's evolved and evolving IP strategy is "Intellectual Property Rights, External Effects, and Anti-trust Law - Leveraging IPRs in the Communications Industry" (Oxford University Press, 2003) written by Ilkka Rahnasto, Nokia's IPR Director who is quoted in todays Press Release on the InterDigital licensing ...
tinyurl.com
Ilkka Rahnasto gave Nokia's view of the ongoing patent dispute in this declaration made to the US District Court here in Delaware in April 2005.
wirelessledger.com
- Eric - |
