   |
|
   |
POPULAR ARTICLES
|
BOOKMARK PAGE
|
PRINT THIS REPORT |
 SEND TO A FRIEND |
 FEEDBACK |
 SEARCH THIS SITE
|
|
Notable
3G Licensing and Royalties (includes InterDigital-Infineon 2G/3G chip partnership revenue stream)
Updated November 22, 2006 Most recent posts are by: olddog967, e500, captainslog, Learning2Vest, my3sons, mmbtx_1, Data Rox, Desert dweller, mschere, lastchoice, revlis, H42, sjaym, jimmylee, ellix, denos16, xdx, , vtem01, The Net, GAMCO, ellismd, Loophole 73, TFWG, dboone, rmarchma, sinnett14, bulldozr, MMC89, revlis, MTJBKH, MSC290, olddog967, Dave Davis, Eric, my3sons, Jim Lur, drrtl, sjaym, idcc2006, Corp Buyer, floridian gg, , spencer, laranger, walldiver, golferwalt,, loophole, dndodd, nicmar, Lucky57, j70k, orientbull, olddog, songioan, pochemunyet and infinite q. What these "best posts" on 3G Licensing and Royalties
These posts address 3G licensing and royalties, in general. Another topic (see Nokia Licensing) addresses the efforts of InterDigital to specifically license Nokia and to deal with the litigation initiated by Nokia against to improven their bargaining position over future royalties for 3G.
From the million-circulation international media giant-
"WirelessLedger.com, a web site that comprehensively covers intellectual property rights and patents on mobile techniques" Korea Times, April 15, 2006
See also: Links to "best posts" on these topics related to InterDigital.
Nokia Licensing Nokia settled a long standing arbitration and federal court litigation over royalties on 2G/2.5G wireless devices with a Nokia payment to InterDigital of $253 April 27th 2006. This topic addresses the efforts of InterDigital to specifically license Nokia and to deal with the litigation initiated by Nokia against to improven their bargaining position over future royalties for 3G. Also see these other related WirelessLedger reports Understanding Intellectual Property Understanding the Standards-Setting Process The Nokia-InterDigital Relationship (30 Year Evolution of InterDigital's Business Model)
is your most comprehensive source for investor research on
3G Licensing and Royalties Posts and Threads (includes InterDigital-Infineon 2G/3G chip partnership revenue stream) (generally most recent posts are first below)
UMTS W-CDMA CDMA2000 TD-SCDMA TDD TD-CDMA HSDPA HSUPA
Graphics/formatting added to many posts for clarity by WirelessLedger.com
IMO:Infineon will shortly announce TWO new WCDMA Baseband wins..odds are they are Apple & Samsung. Infineon Bonked by BenQ Fears Europe's second-largest semiconductor maker, Infineon Technologies (IFX), reported a narrower loss for its fourth quarter on Nov. 16. But traders looked past that improvement and ignored speculation that Infineon may have won a supplier contract for the rumored Apple (AAPL) iPhone. Instead, shares fell more than 3% as market players appeared to fret about next quarter, when the company says it expects the insolvency of a major customer to have a negative impact on revenues and earnings. Munich, Germany-based Infineon's net loss for the three months ended Sept. 30 was €36 million ($46.1 million), as sales rose 16% to €2.29 billion ($2.93 billion). That compares with a €100 million loss a year earlier. Analysts at Citigroup had expected a profit of €8 million in the period, they said in a note to investors. Infineon, the former chip unit of Siemens (SI), has been trying to distance itself from the cyclical computer memory chip business and focus on areas such as automotive and communications chips, where margins are higher. Those efforts suffered a setback in September with the insolvency of BenQ Mobile, Siemens' former handset unit (see BusinessWeek.com, 11/9/06, "Siemens Soars, But BenQ Nags"). The company's communications unit took a €75 million charge in the quarter as a result. In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, Infineon expects revenues and earnings before interest and tax to decrease compared to the fourth quarter, "driven mainly by the impact of the insolvency of BenQ Mobile's German subsidiary on the communications segment," the company said in a statement. Infineon also took an €86 million charge related to the restructuring and subsequent initial public offering of Qimonda, its memory-chip unit, in August. While Infineon has announced plans eventually to exit the memory business entirely, Qimonda still accounted for about half of Infineon's sales in the third quarter. The unit posted earnings before interest and tax of €204 million. Infineon's Auto, Industrial, and Multimarket division also turned in a strong performance, with revenues of €740 million and earnings before interest and tax of €64 million, in line with analyst forecasts. Earnings from these other two units weren't enough, however, to compensate for EBIT losses of €120 million from communications chips, which are used in mobile phones, network equipment, and the like. Infineon says sales in the communications group could drop by about €40 million to €50 million next quarter, according to a note by Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein. "Given the low overall volumes and fixed costs of this business, we would assume that much of this loss in revenue will flow down to the EBIT," Dresdner said. Robert Sanders, one of the report's authors, says he expects Infineon's communications unit to post a loss before interest and tax of €65 million in the period ending December. That's compared to a loss of €45 million this quarter. One cause for optimism surrounding the communications unit has been growing speculation that its chips will be used in the Apple iPhone, which could be unveiled shortly. Infineon and Apple are keeping mum. Should such a phone come out, it would go some way toward restoring investor faith in the wireless segment, says Dresdner Kleinwort's Sanders. But even if 20 million iPhones were to be sold in 2007, Infineon can't make the communications arm profitable by the end of the year unless it wins more customers, he says. Infineon's shares fell 4% to €9.49 on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. Its U.S.-traded American Depositary Receipts were down 3.5% to $12.14 in mid-morning New York trading. mscher
WL: HTC is an IDCC licensee IMO:HTC will generate over $4.5 Billion in sales for 2007.. HTC shipments to HP boosts revenues to record high in October Daniel Shen, Taipei; Steve Shen, DigiTimes.com [Monday 13 November 2006] High Tech Computer (HTC) reported record high revenues of NT$10.71 billion (US$326 million) in October, up 20.6% sequentially and up 24.9% on year. Volume shipments of two GPS PDA phones (the hw6920/6925) to Hewlett-Packard (HP) and more own-brand models helped push up HTC's revenues for October, according to analysts at local securities houses. In addition to beginning volume shipments of a HSDPA phone to Cingular (the Cingular 8525) in early November, the company also will start marketing a BlackBerry-like handset (the C720W), a new slide-form factor PDA phone (the C800) and a HSDPA phone (the D810) by the end of this year, according to company sources. HTC expects its revenues to expand 20-30% sequentially to reach NT$31.6-34.2 billion in the fourth quarter from NT$26.36 billion in the third quarter, indicated company sources. mschere
WL: Arima is an IDCC licensee Currently, Arima Comm’s Taiwan plant annual capacity is 10.0mn handsets, and its Wujiang (China) plant annual capacity is 18.0 mn handsets. The combined annual capacity of Arima Comm is around 28.0mn handsets. Wujiang plant is currently upgrading its capacity. When the project is finished in early 1H07, Arima Comm’s combined annual capacity will be as high as 58.0mn handsets in 2007. mschere GET CHART W-CDMA Goes Top in Japan Five Years After Launch http://www.cellular-news.com/story/20411.php W-CDMA was first launched in Japan by NTT DoCoMo in October 2001, with Softbank Mobile (formerly Vodafone K.K.) joining it 14 months later. Exactly five years to the month after the standard was introduced into the market, W-CDMA has become Japan's leading technology, with customers numbering 34.75m at the end of October 2006. PDC became the leading technology in Japan after overtaking NAMTS, the other proprietary Japanese standard, at the beginning of September 1995, and remained top dog for 11 years until September 2006. At the end of October, however, the technology was consigned to second place, with 34.49m customers. The CDMA standard, which is operated exclusively by KDDI's "au" business in Japan, came in third with 24.89m.
As we remarked in The Mobile World Briefing Issue 40, mobile number portability (MNP) was introduced into Japan for the first time at the beginning of October, and the monthly net additions figures from the market's three players take on added significance as a result. They show resounding success for KDDI, as the company itself had confidently predicted, with DoCoMo being the biggest proportionate loser, giving away 110 basis points of market share over the last month. This may not sound very much, but it is more than the company lost in the last three months put together. Also October was only the first month of MNP: if the effect of portability accelerates during the coming months, as it would be expected to, DoCoMo might find itself in for a rocky ride. Total customer numbers topped 94m for an overall mobile penetration rate of 73.8%; adding in PHS subscriber numbers, which rose again in October, these figures become 99m and 77.6% respectively. Total mobile net additions were 265k in October, which is on the lower end of the range the Japanese market has experienced over the last twelve months. Portability does not necessarily make any difference to overall net additions of course, but rather to the distribution of those additions amongst the players in the market, as churn rates are impacted. It is this proportionate picture which gives the most dramatic view of the effect of MNP in its first month. Perhaps the most surprising observation is the apparent immunity of Softbank Mobile from the fight so far. However, these are very very early days, and to draw any conclusions at this stage would be premature. There is very little doubt that Softbank will get pulled into trading blows with its larger rivals sooner or later, although to what effect remains to be seen - that largely depends on the new management and strategy, which so far has made little noticeable impact on the operator's operational statistics. This article was extracted from The Mobile World Briefing, the weekly newsletter from The Mobile World. To download a sample issue of the Briefing in PDF format, please click here. For more information including full subscription pricing, please visit www.themobileworld.com
Posted by: olddog967 mschere: A copy of the 11 page guideline is available at: http://www.ipjur.com/data/061104SECOND-VENICE-RESOLUTION-001.pdf RE: A group of 26 European patent judges have unanimously agreed on rules of procedure for a planned European patent court. Following a meeting in Venice organized by the EPO and the European Patent Lawyers Association (EPLAW) last week, the judges issued a document on November 4 proposing procedural guidelines for the executive committee of the proposed European Patent Court to consider. The guidelines, which run to 11 pages, were drawn up by a small committee of judges chaired by Lord Justice Jacob of the Court of Appeal in London and including representatives from England, Germany, The Netherlands, France and Italy. This so-called Second Venice Resolution follows a resolution a year ago at which the judges backed the creation of a European Patent Court through the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA). The EPLA was drafted in November 2003 to provide a single cost-effective forum for litigating European patent disputes, and a detailed version of the Agreement, incorporating some changes, was published in December 2005. But the Agreement has not yet been implemented. Last month the European Parliament backed the proposal but identified concerns over what the rules of procedure would be. The judges have addressed some of those concerns by setting out an extensive draft of rules covering the service of proceedings, general structure of proceedings and case management (including written phase, interim phase and oral hearing), protective measures or saisies, provisional measures (preliminary injunctions, ex parte and inter partes injunctions), damages, appeals, enforcement and competence. Kevin Mooney, a partner of Simmons & Simmons and president of EPLAW, said the proposed procedures are "much more continental than British" with oral hearings designed to be concluded in just one day. "It is a very front-loaded procedure, with the arguments and evidence up front, not at the last stage." The procedures provide for a meeting between the parties and a rapporteur judge at an early stage followed by a short oral procedure before at least three judges. The draft rules propose that while expert evidence and cross-examination will be allowed, it will be limited. The statement says: "Oral testimony at or before the oral hearing should be limited to disputes identified by the Judge Rapporteur or the panel of judges as having to be decided by oral evidence ... Experts however should be present at all hearings and be available for questioning by the court or the parties. Questioning shall be under the control of the court and shall be limited to what is strictly necessary." It adds that the judges should aim to give their written judgment within three months of the oral hearing, and that the court should "endeavour to give a judgment without dissenting opinion". They also comment on some "subsidiary principles" including the nationality of judges, the limitation period for damages and the joinder of third parties. The judges recommend that lawyers registered to act before the court should be "attorneys at law who are fully entitled to represent parties in ordinary civil proceedings in the courts of first instance of the convention states". They add that court fees should be set at a level that does not deter litigants: "The level of fees should not be such as to restrict access to the European Patent Court to small and medium size companies." And they said that the location of the court's central chamber "should be readily accessible to all parts of Europe". The EPLA proposes that the European Patent Court have one Central Chamber but that the creation of regional chambers in any member state would also be allowed. These chambers would compete for cases. A number of judges are believed to favour Paris as the site of the Central Chamber. Mooney said the procedural rules should lead to more affordable litigation that will be attractive for both SMEs and multinationals: "It should be a fairer, more just and more sensible procedure for the patent community at large." The European Commission is due to announce its proposals on the EPLA and a Community patent on November 22. Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy has previously indicated that the Commission would support the EPLA and the London Agreement on EPO translations as a means of promoting innovation in Europe. But it is unclear whether the Commission would want to play a role in supervising the court. If the Commission backs the judges' latest proposals, a Diplomatic Conference could be held next year, and the court could be established before 2010. mschere
High-End Cell Phones A Tough Sell
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 11/10/2006 New 3G wireless technology has yet to find a home in emerging markets, where cell phone use has surged. That could spell trouble for cell phone makers looking to such markets for much of their growth. Nokia (NOK) and Motorola (MOT) have prospered selling low-cost phones to first-time users in developing countries. Profit margins for such wares are slim — and getting slimmer. Cell phone makers want to sell pricier models, but the dearth of 3G, or third-generation, wireless networks limits their opportunities. About 75% of the world's wireless networks have yet to be upgraded to 3G, the speedy technology that lets cell phones surf the Internet and download music or video. Areas without 3G include the four fastest-growing wireless nations: Brazil, Russia, India and China, known by the initials BRIC. Only one in 10 mobile phones sold worldwide this year will be a 3G model, says market research firm Informa. By year-end 2010, Informa forecasts that only 9% of cell phone users in BRIC countries will be using 3G phones, whereas Japan is at more than 60%. "I don't think 3G will be a big help for handset (phone) makers" in BRIC nations, said Gavin Patterson, an analyst at U.K.-based Informa. Brazil, Russia, India and China have yet to issue national spectrum licenses for 3G services, he says. Olympic Goal "We really don't know when there'll be 3G in China, which has been aiming for the (2008) Olympics," he said. Why does 3G in emerging markets matter to cell phone makers? Handset sales growth in these markets has overtaken growth in Japan, Western Europe and the U.S Merrill Lynch says developing countries — including Southeast Asia, Africa, eastern Europe, and the Middle East — will account for 63% of global unit sales in 2007, up from 42% in 2003. This shift to emerging markets has shaved the average selling price of phone models. ASP is a key metric for cell phone makers. In Japan, 3G has spurred demand for mobile phones that send photos, download music or video clips, and access e-mail. It also has boosted sales in Europe and the U.S., though 3G hasn't gained a lot of steam in those markets yet. In developing countries, though, most people use mobile phones just to make calls. Prices for low-end phones have dropped to $30-$40 in emerging markets, analysts say. In these generally poor markets, most cell phone users aren't big spenders. On average, consumers in many developing countries spend $10 to $15 a month on wireless services vs. roughly $50 in the U.S. Wireless firms are wary of upgrading to 3G in many markets for fear they won't recoup that investment, says Randy Giusto, an analyst at market research firm IDC. "It's going to be a real struggle to get 3G services into emerging markets," Giusto said. Still, cell phone makers are upbeat about 3G's potential. Nokia and Motorola sell some high-end models to the affluent in BRIC nations. They aim to build on that success. Nokia says demand for its N-series multimedia phones has been surprisingly strong in China. "Emerging markets are not just about low-end devices. Take India. It's a polarized market. There is demand for sophisticated (devices) in cities," but also for cheap phones, said Tero Ojanpera, Nokia's chief technology officer. Surging economies are boosting the size of the middle class in India and China. Cell phone makers argue that wireless service providers would turn a profit from 3G investments in BRIC and other developing countries. "It's still early days," Ojanpera said. "There is momentum. There is a need for higher (network) speed. Once the networks are out Replacement-Cycle Growth Motorola has had success in China with its Ming smart phone. Allen Burnes, Motorola's vice president of high-growth markets, says wireless firms in developing countries do a good job of selling simple data services via slower 2G networks. Motorola expects to sell more high-end models in developing countries, even if 3G services aren't rolled out soon. "As our brand grows, our ability to sell mid- and high-tier handsets grows," he said. "It's clear there's a revolution going on in these places. People have a lot more disposable income, and they trade up to (better) handsets very quickly." Some analysts agree. They say affluent consumers in emerging markets will replace their first phones with models equipped with color screens, built-in cameras or music players. So will fashion- or status-conscious consumers. Merrill Lynch says this "replacement cycle" in emerging markets will be the cell phone industry's main growth driver in 2007."People tend to get something better than they had before, whether it's a car, clothes or a cell phone. There's potential in the upgrade market," said Tuong Nguyen, an analyst with research firm Gartner.
Posted by: JimLur To all, Here's the transcript of yesterdays CC. http://wirelessledger.com/IDCC-Transcript%203Q-2006%2011-01-06.doc Posted by: Learning2vest It's not gonna play well with some, but that has never bothered this old mule before. Liked, and was not surprised by, what was said on the cc this morning. ASIC products will give leverage to patent licensing if they are good, and I'm betting that our propeller heads at IDCC will deliver ASIC products that are better than good. I think the move from offering to license the firm's patented tech to delivering fully enabling components is brilliant. It leverages partners to create a much bigger threat to manufacturers who dare to tread on your patent rights. When/if IDCC is "the firm to see" for hot chips that kick ass in the commercial market(why else would they even try?), the game will change. THIS interested observer likes that strategy one HELL of a lot better than watching IDCC pay a bunch of lawyers obscene rates to piss in each other's boots for another decade of litigation. Put this scenario up on the wall just for fun- It's 2008 and IDCC has a line of fully integrated baseband modem ASIC components that are the hottest things going for 3G standards compliant operations,... AND,.. they are multi-mode capable with WLAN/WiMax(Yowser!). In addition, IDCC has the engineering services resources to make those products work with just about anybody's application design. The manufacturing contractors who build hot selling wireless devices for everybody are standing at the ready in Tiawan when somebody like a Steve Jobs at Apple decides to create "the next great wireless thing" with an IDCC engine and transmission. Millions of those next generation wireless IPOD things start selling and other wireless manufacturers have to respond with something that performs as well. Where does THAT kind of scenario put the IDCC vs Nokia relationship? HUH??? I'm thinking it put's it in a better place than some sleepy slick's courtroom is where.
Posted by: captainslog I may not be an old old timer, but IDCC management has never talked that tough. And I don't recall them talking that tough in their 8K either. Imagine what the message is around the negotiation table. It is obscene what ERICY, NOK, SAM have been able to get away with, but with a clean contractual legal slate going into 3G, and a very consistent, strong message, I think IDCC can finally deliver licensing deals from the negotiation table and not from the ICC arbitration table or from the courtroom bench. Look at LG, and as IDCC stays strong and stays the course, so to speak, it is clear to others that there is no longer is an incentive to delay by any means possible. What I'm most impressed about new management is that they stay firm and consistent, and they that they will wait until the deal is good for IDCC. That message resonates throughout the industry. it's clear and unambiguous because they have a clean contractual and legal slate going into 3G and ERICY, NOK and SAM won't find it financially beneficial to delay by any means possible. At the negotiation table, IDCC can now promise other companies that it is a financial benefit to to sign early. IDCC is in a position to give incentives that matter to those who sign early rather than late. The carrot that IDCC can offer is that if you wait another quarter or another year, you will actually save money. While NOK may have gotten off cheap for the 2G obligations, they still had to pay far more than they ever thought. 300 million isn't something even the CEO at NOK can ignore. It makes heads turn. That in itself has earned IDCC tremendous respect. With a clean slate and the bad contractual terms behind them, companies have reason to fear that they will end up paying millions more if they wait and forego prepayment discounts today. LG is prime example. They got the message, and I think others have taken notice. While NOK, ERICY, SAM and others may always be belligerent when it comes to the IPR that they steal, they don't scoff at IDCC today in the same way that they have in the past. All these companies are seriously weighing the actual financial cost it will take to delay signing with IDCC as well as the competitive advantage of doing so. RE: One thing that was difference about this conference call was that BM was not shy about talking about current legal matters. He did not say that there could be no questions about Samsung because of the legal situations and BM was not shy to let everybody know how he felt about the latest legal maneuvers of Samsung and even threatening to seize assets. This open and tough talk about IDCC legal adversaries is something new. I don't think I ever heard such talk before perhaps the oldtimers could remember if it happened during MOT/IDCC. mo Posted by: JimLur Option NV a IDCC licensee reported 3rd quarter earnings this AM. Highlights of the third quarter and year to date included: 3Q06 Vendor Highlights • Nokia: The Finnish powerhouse once again exceeded expectations and set a new industry record by shipping 88.5 million units in the third quarter, surpassing their previous record by 4.8 million units. Double-digit sequential growth was evident in Europe, Asia/Pacific, and North America, with China being a key driver. The growth in China and Asia/Pacific underscores Nokia's emphasis on remaining the top seller in emerging markets. News usually surrounds Nokia's announcements of high-end devices, but the record number of shipments shows that Nokia continues to produce mass shipments of low-end devices equipped to suit the needs of those in emerging markets. • Motorola: Expectations were set high for Motorola in the third quarter, and while some expectations were not met, it should not be overlooked that this was another record-setting quarter . The company continues to excel in 2006 with its sixth straight quarter of growth near 40% or better. Motorola also offered more news on the expansion of the RAZR family, with the launch of the new KRZR and announcements of the RAZR MAXX and the RIZR to follow soon. Continued success from the Q was also a driver of shipments for Motorola in the converged mobile device space. • Samsung: Having spent the first half of the year approaching thirty million units shipped in a quarter, Samsung reached that milestone in 3Q06 and maintained a ten million units lead over the number four vendor, Sony Ericsson. The release of its 'Ultra-Edition' line, a series of slim and stylish devices, in Europe, along with shipment recovery in North America helped drive Samsung's performance in the quarter. • Sony Ericsson: Celebrating its five year anniversary, the 50/50 venture reached a record shipment volume during the quarter. Having moved past LG Electronics for the number four position worldwide in 2Q06, the company extended its lead by more than three million units. In addition, the success of its mid- and high-priced devices, including its Cybershot-branded phones, helped lift ASPs higher than the previous quarter. • LG Electronics: In addition to reaching a new shipment record this quarter, LG also posted a return to profitability after two quarters of losses. Despite these gains, LG fell further behind the other leading vendors this quarter. North America was the primary beneficiary of its shipments, accounting for nearly half of the company's total volumes thanks in large part to the success of its Chocolate phone. Similarly, the company made gains in Europe and Korea. CHART 3GSales
3Q 2006 Mobile Device Shipments Top 245 Million, On Target for 1 Billion by Year End, According to ABI Research LONDON--(Business Wire)--The second quarter of 2006 was a bit softer than expected in terms of handset shipments and prices, but ABI Research anticipates that 4Q 2006 will prove a bumper quarter for mobile operators and handset vendors. "The market topped 245 million mobile devices shipped in 3Q 2006 and the global mobile devices marketplace is on target to reach one billion devices by the year's end," said Jake Saunders, research director of ABI Research. "The handset vendors are pulling out all the stops to get their slickest, flattest, largest music memory, biggest mega-pixel camera phones onto the shelves in time for the 4Q-2006 holiday jamborees." The Gang of Five -- Nokia (36%), Motorola (23.3%), Samsung (12.5%), Sony Ericsson (8.1%), and LG (6.7%) -- all increased market share at the expense of the smaller handset vendors. Economies of scale, and marketing, it seems, are everything. "Initiatives such as super thin phones have helped manufacturers such as Samsung and Motorola gain market share, but Nokia's ability to pump out phones for the emerging markets, cut handset average selling prices (ASPs), and exploit its brand image have served to maintain, and even boost, Nokia's market-share," said principal analyst Stuart Carlaw. The net result of this scramble for market share has been lower ASPs. "The global weighted ASP dropped a steep -7.8% in 3Q 2006 compared to a 1.6% rise in 2Q 2006," said Saunders, "4Q 2006 is unlikely to fare any better. The competition is cut-throat." 3G handset shipment volumes proved to be a bit soft in 3Q 2006. 2.75G EDGE, which has been rolled out by a number of operators, has made the perceived performance gain of owning a 3G phone over a 2G GSM phone less distinct. Also, a number of vendors and operators are planning a big overhaul of their 3G phone line up for 4Q 2006. Recently Vodafone announced that it will be unveiling ten new phones for the festive season, six of which are 3.5G HSDPA-capable. HSDPA effectively "turbo-charges" the 3G experience. HSPDA will dramatically change the download experience for end users wishing to download music, games, etc. The question is, will the turbo-charge kick in quickly enough? The latest handset market data from ABI Research may be found in the Mobile Devices Market Forecasts that form part of the company's Mobile Devices Research Service (http://www.abiresearch.com/products/service/Mobile_Devices_ Research_Service) (Due to its length, this URL may need to be copied/pasted into your Internet browser's address field. Remove the extra space if one exists.) which also includes Research Reports, Research Briefs, Market Data, Online Databases, ABI Insights and analyst inquiry support. Founded in 1990 and headquartered in New York, ABI Research maintains global operations supporting annual research programs, intelligence services, and market reports in broadband and multimedia, RFID and M2M, wireless connectivity, mobile wireless, transportation, and emerging technologies. For information, visit www.abiresearch.com, or call +1.516.624.2500. ABI Research
Posted by: my3sons87 Walking thru Best Buy last night, I counted about 6 LG phones including the Chocolate, and 5 Sanyo's. There were also a couple of nice SNE. But the Chocolate is way cool. I see why it was such a big hit. My point is that all of the above are IDCC licensee's. The more they sell the better for us.
Posted by: lastchoice rev, someday ifx's ultra-low-cost phones will be 3g. the economic incentive to the service provider will pull all the technology to 3g rapidly. RE: The rapid development of tightly integrated and low cost chipsets from companies such as NXP Semiconductors, Texas Instruments and Infineon Technologies means that shipments of Ultra Low Cost (ULC) mobile phones could reach 48 million units next year, according to Strategy Analytics. http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=193301249
Posted by: Data_Rox m3s - you can think of many of these companies as contract manufacturers - as the final product won't be sold by them to the operator or channel, but will be by the contracting company. Do you think that Arima or Quanta or whoever has a better negotiating position for licensing on the finished product than say... Nokia does? No. Would they have in place all the cross licensing arrangments and paid up licenses that Nokia does? No. Nokia, Motorola, S/E and others that use 3rd parties to manufacture do just that....pay them to manufacture and in some cases design. Those companies then take in the product just as if they made it themselves and distribute it...under the terms of THEIR obligations. They would never turn to a 3rd party to manufacture if the overall cost is higher than if they did it themselves. There are a few exceptions, but on the whole this is how it works with the biggies that make up the majority of the market share. If they've got paid-up licenses for the product they sell, they will not pay for it again...even indirectly. HTC is an example of a company that makes product for others under different brands, and they also sell end product themselves....that is why they have a license....to cover themselves as well as for the little guys that can't negotiate a license. The little guys (without appropriate licensing themselves) that want to buy a product from an ODM or contract manufacturer, will weigh getting the license themselves, or seeing if the contract manufacturer can do it or has arrangments to do it. You can call the company if you need further understanding. Ask ....if in 2007, if one of our licensees manufactures a 2G product for Nokia with the Nokia brand, will we get a royalty? RE: I do understnad having a paid up license for a particular standard would relieve the licensee from having to pay against that standard. But the ODM as well.
Posted by: Learning2vest bulldzr, a thought re IDCC patent value at the chip level vs at the finished device level. I'm guessing it might have something to do with the difference between "what" and "how". We know that most of IDCC's patents relate to making the radio transmissions between mobile handsets and base stations work effectively, i.e., the "air interface". IDCC's patents cover the way a mobile handset and a network of base stations talk to each other. Some examples are pilot channel, closed loop power control, interference cancellation, and multi-mode handover techniques. Let's call all of those very important wireless radio functions the "what" that finished devices must do to work right and in compliance with established standards. Key point is that none of those IDCC "air interface" patents relate to "how" the internal components of handsets and base stations get designed and manufactured. No patents on which functions get designed into the ASIC logic instead of being put into the software programs that will run on that processor for example. IDCC's patents seem to be more about "what" those internal component and software designs end up doing when they are all put together in a finished product than about "how" they go about getting it done. IMO that would explain why IDCC's licensing focus is at the finished product level while firms like QCOM who design, manufacture, and sell the internal components must also protect their patented designs on those pieces and parts. Said another way, component manufacturers like QCOM have patents covering "how" their chip and software designs are able to do "what" IDCC has some very important patents on.
Hmmm... Is it ok to use an overseas foundry partner like Infineon on a DOD funded project these days? And wonder who IDCC will ask to build the handset prototypes for them? Moto?? Given how big a DOD handset buy could turn out to be when/if it happens, there has to be a lot of interest.
FOR LONG ISLAND DEFENSE PROJECTS September 26, 2006 * InterDigital Communications Corporation - Advanced Wireless Technologies - $1 Million Third Generation (3G) Systems will provide access, by means of one or more radio links, to a wide range of telecommunication services supported by the fixed telecommunication networks and to other services that are specific to mobile users. Funding will allow Interdigital and the DOD to demonstrate the feasibility of a 3G tactical wireless handset, including delivery of a chipset, that can operate in a frequency band allowing for worldwide terrestrial operation, evaluate 3G waveform enhancements needed for future radio and satellite devices, evaluate emerging commercial technologies beyond 3G for improved performance of small handheld devices or sensors, and continue the evaluation of advanced antenna schemes to improve overall wireless system performance.
Posted by: Gamco 3G Licensing to lower down licensing fees for Taiwan makers Posted : October 06, 2006 Taiwan – Licensing fees for 3G handsets manufactured by Taiwan makers is expected to be lowered by the 3G Licensing body, according to the Technology Transfer and Service Center (TTSC) of the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI). On average, Taiwan makers are paying a licensing fee of US$2 to US$3 for each 3G handsets using patented technologies owned by 3GLL member companies, including Fujitsu, KPN, Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, NTT DoCoMo, NTT, Sharp and Siemens. The fee may be cut by at least US$1 per piece, when representatives of 3GLL discuss a preferential licensing agreement with local handset makers in October. The 3GLL currently holds a total of 211 patents, or about 20 percent of related 3G technologies. InterDigital, Qualcomm, Nokia and Ericsson hold 80 percent of the patented technologies. ITRI holds 155 related 3G patents. http://www.telecom.globalsources.com/gsol/I/3G-phone/a/9000000079459.htm Gamco
abridged post See original post for detail Posted by: my3sons87 Old 2003 research paper on IDCC by Currin. Everyone should read it. Still applicable. The 2.5/3G Licensing of Interdigital Perhaps some of you know this company has been referred to a “baby Qualcomm” in the wireless community. For others this may be your first exposure to Interdigital. Interdigital has a strong portfolio of patents resulting in revenues associated with 2G and 2.5G wireless. These patents are already bringing in lump sum back payments and royalty bearing licensing from cell phone and wireless infrastructure players. Interdigital has key enabling patents for the transfer of data associated with large downloads of digital media such as streaming video over cell phone interface standards. Understand more how the adoption of high speed wireless connectivity to the internet via cell phones is married to 3G and to Interdigital. Interdigital Communications Corporation (IDCC) is a Patent Leader The first place I’d like to start with having you understand Interdigital is to realize there are over a billion cell phones in use in the world. Despite the recent woes in the telecommunications sector, cell phone usage is continuing to increase and is forecast to be over 3 billion in several years. The second thing to realize is there are almost as many acronyms in the wireless world as there are phones. With that in mind I have a mini glossary of items in this report to help you understand some of the terms you will see as we follow this company. But understanding the minutia of each technology is not the key to understanding Interdigital. The key is understanding that Interdigital’s patents enable many of the technologies. The fundamental business of Interdigital is the world of developing and licensing technologies for wireless communications. Before we even get into who is licensing which acronym just consider the roster of licensees Interdigital already has. The list includes Ericsson, Sony Ericsson, NEC, Sony, Research in Motion, and Sharp as the most significant of the 35 licensees. Interdigital is currently in negotiations to license and receive back payments as well as future royalties from Samsung and Nokia. They already have reached such agreement with Ericsson and NEC. Obviously there is something Interdigital has that these companies need. In a nutshell what these companies need is access to Interdigital’s patent portfolio and expertise. The current volatility of Interdigital is due to issues associated with Nokia for licensing involving technologies widely in use already. Nokia during the course of the negotiations asked a court to unseal the Ericsson/Interdigital agreement. What exactly Nokia is up to did not please the market. Of course for a long term investor that can often be a good thing. WL: This article in post is too long for this space. Here are categories covered in the article. See original My2Sons post for more information. The Licensing Is Really Just Taking Effect Companies Relying On Patent Licensing Revenues The wireless technologies Cellular Primer/Glossary Where Interdigital Fits In All this Alphabet Soup What is TDD? Financial On first glance of a trailing PE, Interdigital looks like a richly valued stock. But take a closer look and you will see the power of patent this company is adding to the bottom line will quickly change that. In an industry under capital pressure, Interdigital reduces capital requirements. In an industry that needs to have bandwidth they enable bandwidth while reducing cost. Interdigital has healthy profit margins, no debt, and a strong patent position in an industry that is reviving itself financially while experiencing constant growth. In my opinion, Interdigital truly does represent a potential for incredible returns. This stock could easily double within the next 18 months and move higher from there in the long term.
Infineon and InterDigital Expand Cooperation
MUNICH, Germany & KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 4, 2006--Infineon Technologies AG (FSE/NYSE:IFX) and InterDigital Communications Corporation (NASDAQ:IDCC) today announced the expansion of their relationship. Infineon has licensed its field-proven GSM/GPRS/EDGE baseband modem, the S-GOLD(R)3, and protocol stack software from Comneon (a wholly-owned subsidiary) to InterDigital. InterDigital also announced the availability of a complete dual-mode 2G/3G wireless modem platform, including the 3G protocol stack, the licensed technology from Infineon, and InterDigital's own 3G baseband design (WCDMA, HSDPA and HSUPA).
"By licensing our proven baseband technology and protocol stack software to InterDigital, we have increased our ability to expand our leadership in the mobile solutions arena by reaching additional customers interested in developing 2G/3G dual-mode technologies," said Clemens Jargon, Infineon's Vice President and General Manager of Business Unit Feature Phone. "This expanded agreement with InterDigital will shorten the time to market for customers, opening new opportunities and revenue streams for Infineon," he added. The combination of Infineon's leading-edge 2G technology with InterDigital's advanced 3G solution optimizes performance, price, size, and power consumption. This complete modem solution offers customers: -- E-GPRS multi-slot class 12 -- Transmit diversity and Single Antenna Interference -- Comneon's platform independent dual mode WEDGE Protocol Stack -- HSDPA Cat. 8 (up to 7.2 Mbps in downlink) -- HSUPA Cat. 3 (up to 1.5 Mbps in uplink) -- WCDMA advanced receiver and optional receive diversity Under the terms of the extended agreement with Infineon, InterDigital has the right to use the Infineon 2G technology in its own modem offering or to sublicense the technology to third parties developing their own 2G/3G modem offerings. InterDigital also gains access to all of the applicable design specifications, source code and other design data for Infineon's integrated GSM/GPRS/EDGE baseband and protocol stack technology, including the S-GOLD(R)3 baseband processor ASIC design with support for Infineon's market leading RF, Power Management and Connectivity modules as well as related components. "Through the licensing of the Infineon technology, we have fully-enabled all three market channels we intend to use for our modem business," added William J. Merritt, InterDigital's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Those market channels are the licensing of components of the modem, the licensing of the complete design, and the sale of ASICs. We believe that the ability to offer this complete technology suite in a variety of manners, and in a complementary fashion with our patents, can be a value driver for InterDigital." An InterDigital NEWS RELEASE: InterDigital Congratulates Infineon on Powering the Newly Launched GPRS/UMTS 3G Handsets from Panasonic KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa., Oct 06, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- InterDigital Communications Corporation (NASDAQ:IDCC) congratulates Infineon Technologies AG on the commercial launch of its GPRS/UMTS multimedia platform in Panasonic's new handsets for the Japanese market. "We congratulate Infineon on the commercial launch in one of the most demanding markets," said Mark Lemmo, InterDigital's Senior Business Development and Product Management Officer. "This milestone validates the maturity of InterDigital's contributions and the competitiveness of the platform which has achieved full conformance and successful interoperability testing." Infineon's leading dual mode platform includes InterDigital's contributions to the 3G protocol stack and baseband designs. In accordance with the broad technology agreement between the two companies, InterDigital will receive royalties on a per unit basis for all 3G platforms which include this technology.
Posted by: JimLur To All, Marsala issues new report on Infineon news. http://wirelessledger.com/26122.pdf
Posted by: JimLur In reply to: None To All here's a new report Casey Ryan issued after the Infineon news. http://wirelessledger.com/IDCC-20061005.pdf To add here's some comments one of our investors sent me made by Briefing.com about Ryan's comments. 05-Oct-06 08:25 ET Interdigital Comm: Infineon licensing deal small positive; Samsung resolution remains key issue - Nollenberger Capital (34.80) Nollenberger Capital notes IDCC announced that it has expanded its licensing relationship with Infineon (IFX), which is licensing technology that enables IDCC to provide a complete 2G wireless baseband solution for mobile handsets. Firm does not believe this licensing deal will lead to meaningful rev or EPS over the next 12-18 months. Firm believes that a final settlement with Samsung remains the most critical objective for IDCC mgmt to focus on over the next three to six months. Firm believes that resolving the Samsung arbitration and subsequent legal action is the top priority for IDCC mgmt in the near term. Firm continues to believe that payment by Samsung to IDCC could still occur in 4Q but firm sees an increased chance of the payment slipping into Y07 due to the last-ditch legal efforts by Samsung.
Posted by: Desert dweller I like these numbers as far as Infineon's prior year chip sales. Hopefully when 3g ramps up and the number of phones being sold with 3g is higher than last year's total phone sales in a few years, hopefully Infineon can sell as many chips with IDCC's technology inside. I know it will be years before that happens but if somehow we can be paid royalties on 200 million chips, that has to be anywhere from $50 million/year at $.25 per chip all the way up to $200 million/year at $1.00 per chip at some point in the future. I really don't think we will be getting $1.00 per chip but you never know. Add to that the royalties on the phones and you have to wonder how high the stock price will be in the future. Now if management is only able to sign a 3g agreement or two AND give us some indication of the projected amount of chips Infineon is targeting for next year during the next cc, we could get a nice pop before year end. That would be nice.
Posted by: mschere IMO:Samsung will be Infineon's next win for their GPRS/UMTS multimedia platform Infineon supplies chips for Samsung EDGE handsets April 24, 2006 German chip maker Infineon has announced that Samsung has selected its single-chip radio frequency transceiver for its new EDGE handsets. Samsung EDGE handsets with Infineon's Smarti PM CMOS chip are scheduled to go to market in the second half of 2006. Infineon claims that its chip reduces component count in a complete GPRS/EDGE radio by 30 per cent, requiring 50 per cent less board space for radio frequency than typical handset solutions. The Smarti PM CMOS chip is a qud-band chip for GSM/GPRS/EDGE 850/900/1800/1900 spectrums. Infineon claims to be the world leader in radio frequency chips, having sold more than 200m units in 2005.
Posted by: rmarchma Jimlur re analysts' comments about Infineon news These are two separate news items about IDCC and Infineon as follows: (1) IDCC has licensed Infineon's 2G/2.5G chip solutions into its own dual-mode 2G/3G modem solution. IDCC hopes to sell its 2G/3G modem solution to third parties, including chip companies and handset manufacturers. These would probably be second tier companies, not the first tier companies IMO. If IDCC does sell its modem solution to someone else, then IDCC will owe some royalty to Infineon for its 2G/2.5G portion of IDCC's dual-mode modem solution. (2) Infineon has begun selling its dual-mode 2G/3G chips to handset manufacturers. IDCC has furnished the layer 2 and 3 portions of the 3G protocol stack for Infineon's chips. Therefore when Infineon sales its 2G/3G chip, then IDCC is due to receive royalty from Infineon. Two analysts have made some comment about (1) above, but no analyst has yet to make any comment about (2) above. I think (2) has much more revenue potential to IDCC at this juncture, than (1).
What IDCC and Infineon had to say in January 06. InterDigital and Infineon Expand Cooperative Agreement to Include HSDPA Technology Development
"Infineon believes that by partnering with InterDigital in our 3G protocol stack development, we can more quickly bring a mature 3GPP Release 5 product to our customers, with committed HSDPA deliveries this quarter. We therefore are pleased to have expanded our joint 3G development with InterDigital to include HSDPA," said Thomas Lindner, Senior Director of Marketing at Infineon's Mobile Software Business Unit. "Infineon is the second customer for HSDPA solutions from InterDigital, further validating our strength as an effective technology partner and leading provider of HSDPA technology," said Mark Lemmo, Senior Business Development and Product Management Officer. InterDigital and Infineon also amended the royalty structure established under their original 2001 cooperative agreement. The new royalty rate structure extends the term and amends the per-unit royalty rates to be paid to InterDigital for the sale of Infineon's ASICs containing jointly-developed protocol stack software This news release is available online at http://www.infineon.co
Posted by: bulldzr Another IDCC/IFX article, sorry if already posted. (Thanks to eneerg on AB). Notice Merritt's comments (bolded). http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800436729_499489_3e0b4f84_no.HTM Infineon, Interdigital fuel ties with combined 2G/3G solution
Infineon licensed its GSM/ GPRS/EDGE S-GOLD 3 baseband modem and a protocol stack software from subsidiary Comneon to InterDigital Communications Corp., intensifying ties between the two suppliers and coming up with an optimum 2G/3G modem solution. The combined 2G and 3G solution from Infineon and InterDigital offer optimum performance, price, size and power consumption. Key features include E-GPRS multi-slot class 12, transmit diversity and single antenna interference cancellation, Comneon's platform independent dual mode WEDGE protocol stack, and WCDMA advanced receiver and optional receive diversity. Moreover, the solution has HSDPA Cat. 8, enabling up to 7.2Mbps in downlink and HSUPA Cat. 3, enabling up to 1.5Mbps in uplink. "InterDigital now offers an entire dual-mode 2G/3G modem suite to customers," said Mark Lemmo, senior business development and product management officer at InterDigital. "By integrating this market proven, evolutionary 2G technology with our own leading-edge WCDMA technology, we have a compelling design solution for semiconductor companies seeking to enter the 3G market, as well as handset manufacturers seeking to design and produce their own 2G/3G modems." Under the extended agreement with Infineon, InterDigital has the right to use Infineon's 2G technology in its own modem offering or to sublicense the technology to third parties developing their own 2G/3G modem offerings. InterDigital also gains access to all applicable design specifications, source code and other design data for Infineon's integrated GSM/GPRS/EDGE baseband and protocol stack technology, including S-GOLD 3 baseband processor ASIC design with support for Infineon's market leading RF, Power Management and Connectivity modules as well as related components. Later and Best, bulldzr
Posted by: lastchoice this is just the start. idcc contributed some software algorith and the silicon gates to get it done. idcc's hsdpa blocks are fully designed silicon--written in a portable, hardware-description-language. idcc' in essence has the chip and a customer can put it right down on their own silicon--minimizing the cost. with the software they have, they can give the handset/pc motherboard/modem card customers a turnkey design. if the td-scdma puzzle comes together, they could be selling virtual handsets to enormous manufacturers. then it could be 200M x $7 per handset. Billion--with a 'B'
Posted by: Desert dweller My guess is that this is just the beginning of phones using Infineon's chips. Assuming this thing works well, and there is no reason to assume otherwise since it is Infineon selling it, if they capture even 10% of the market in the future, it should be a decent amount of money for IDCC. A few years from now there will be a billion 3g phones being sold each year. If Infineon captures 10% of the market and we get even just $.25 per phone, that is almost $.50/share extra in earnings for IDCC. That alone translates into $10 per share at a 20 multiple. Why don't analysts see this? This one small source of future revenue for IDCC could account for almost a third of today's market value and we all know that this will only be a small piece of IDCC's revenue pie. This is good news and hopefully we can get some guidance on the projected number of phones that will be using Infineons chips in the near future.
Posted by: Gamco sjratty - regarding your post copied below: It is important to note that no IDCC analyst's report currently includes ANY ESTIMATE of this new stream of income! Any idea as to how much revenue this will bring? Gamco
Posted by: spencer So IDCC will get double royalties from Panasonic sales in Japan (once from Panasonic and once from Infineon). Cool!
Posted by: Data_Rox DD IMO, the company is working on some niche opportunities for the platform and to some degree may be helping IFX with integration services. The net to IDCC may be that they get less back from IFX/Comneon on the stack shipping with the 3H in exchange for the products licensed yesterday....or maybe they are separate transactions.... JMO
Posted by: olddog967 jangis: As you stated, we have been working with Infineon for quite a while. Maybe it is finally coming to fruition. From the 2001 10-K: " In March, 2001, we entered into a broad, long-term cooperative relationship with Infineon Technologies AG (Infineon) involving the development of FDD (Layer 2/3) software for use with Infineon's terminal unit 3G system-on-a-chip ASICs (Joint 3G Protocol Stack). Each party will own the technology it develops under the agreement. The agreement provides for us to be compensated on a per unit royalty basis on sales of Infineon ASICs containing the Joint 3G Protocol Stack. The agreement also provides that we will serve as If we commence a comparable FDD (Layer 2/3) development effort with another semiconductor company, Infineon may choose to secure another source for its Layer 2/3 solution. The agreement provides for joint marketing of the Joint 3G Protocol Stack in terminal unit applications, as mutually agreed, subject to certain time-to-market restrictions as regards each new software version. Infineon and the Company are each permitted to independently market and use their own portions of the Joint 3G Protocol Stack without restriction. Infineon has committed to cooperate in enabling us to design custom 3G ASICs based on an Infineon platform for both infrastructure and selected terminal unit applications where Infineon would serve as the foundry. Infineon is permitted to sell InterDigital's custom ASICs within its portfolio of products and to re-use our reference design in non-competitive products. We are permitted to market Infineon's standard ASICs which are not a part of the co-development agreement and should receive a commission fixed at then current standard rates. Under the agreement, the parties have cross-licensed each other under patents generally applicable to the jointly developed software and related products. The parties have also agreed to a framework for determining royalties in other 2G and 3G products." http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/354913/000095011601000565/0000950116-01-000565-0001.txt RE:
Posted by: mschere IMO:While the Infineon news will bring a fresh revenue stream for Infineon,it is the precursor of announcements of new 3G licensees by IDCC.It will permit IDCC to barter a commission on a $30 Chip set for a comprehensive 2G/3G License. "By licensing our proven baseband technology and protocol stack software to InterDigital, we have increased our ability to expand our leadership in the mobile solutions arena by reaching additional customers interested in developing 2G/3G dual-mode technologies," said Clemens Jargon, Infineon's Vice President and General Manager of Business Unit Feature Phone. ++++ "This expanded agreement with InterDigital will shorten the time to market for customers, opening new opportunities and revenue streams for Infineon," he added.+++++ mschere
Posted by: mschere Goldman Sachs upgrades to BUY 4-Oct-06 08:58 LONDON (MarketWatch) -- Goldman Sachs upgraded chip maker Infineon Technologies (IFX : infineon technologies to buy from neutral, saying it believes Infineon's residual businesses are greatly undervalued. Goldman Sachs said it believes insolvency proceedings at rival BenQ Germany will increase Infineon management's willingness to consider a more significant restructuring of the communications business, which would likely be a positive catalyst for shares. mschere
Posted by: dndodd Not Long!! Would be the logical thought. RE:
Posted by: my3sons87 It is time to monetize this along with a couple of new IPR licenses. Complete 2G/3G Dual-Mode Protocol Stack Now Available from InterDigital; Dual-Mode Protocol Stack Fully Interoperability Tested with GCF Certification Expected Q1 2006 The complete dual-mode protocol stack is available for integration with existing dual-mode baseband solutions. Alternatively, the single-mode 3G stack can be integrated with existing GSM/GPRS/EDGE designs. Key features of the solution include the following items: -- Global Certification Forum (GCF) -certified legacy 2G protocol stack with 75 type approvals and interoperability tested by more than 80 operators in 40 countries; -- 2G/3G dual-mode protocol stack completed ten interoperability tests with major equipment producers and operators; -- 2G/3G dual-mode protocol stack GCF certification expected in early Q1 2006; -- High data throughput performance - customer-based interoperability tests validated peak data rates of 384 kbps in UMTS offerings; -- Adaptable to future releases including UMTS Release 5 scheduled in Q1 2006 and UMTS Release 6 scheduled in the second half of 2006; -- Seamless handover between GSM/GPRS/EDGE and UMTS networks. "A key initiative for us has been to create a comprehensive product offering that we can offer to terminal unit manufacturers in a complimentary fashion with our strong patent portfolio," noted William J. Merritt, InterDigital's President and Chief Executive Officer. "The recent licensing of legacy GSM/GPRS/EDGE technology from Infineon Technologies AG (Infineon) completes a high value dual-mode protocol stack that both expands the target market for our product offerings and creates new synergistic offerings for handset licensees." InterDigital's integrated dual-mode protocol stack is comprised of Infineon's 2G protocol stack and the 3G protocol stack co-developed by InterDigital and Infineon. InterDigital offers full customer support from initial integration through product introduction. To learn more about InterDigital's technology and products, contact sales@interdigital.com. Posted by: Data_Rox 3G Licensing may cut licensing fees for Taiwan handset makers Daniel Shen, Taipei; Steve Shen, DigiTimes.com [Wednesday 27 September 2006] http://www.digitimes.com/telecom/a20060927A8046.html The 3G Licensing entity (3GLL), the licensing administrator of the W-CDMA patent licensing program, is expected to lower the licensing fees levied on 3G handsets manufactured by Taiwan makers, according to sources at the Technology Transfer and Service Center (TTSC) of the government-backed Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI). Currently, Taiwan makers are paying a licensing fee of US$2-3 on average for each of 3G handsets using patented technologies owned by 3GLL member companies, which include Fujitsu, KPN, Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, NTT DoCoMo, NTT, Sharp and Siemens, the sources noted. The amount of the licensing fee may be cut by at least US$1 per piece, when representatives of 3GLL visit Taiwan next month for a discussion of a preferential licensing agreement with local handset makers, the sources indicated. The 3GLL currently holds a total of 211 patents, or about 20%, of related 3G technologies, while the most of the rest of 80% of patented technologies are held, respectively, by +++ InterDigital, ++++ Qualcomm, Nokia and Ericsson, the sourced said, noting that ITRI itself holds 155 related 3G patents.
Posted by: olddog967 Ghors: The Patent bill proposed last month by Sen Hatch and cosponsored by Sen Leahy is related to the Patent Reform Bill introduced in the House last year. S.3818 A good summary of the House bill is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_Reform_Act_of_2005 According to the summary the only capping of infringement awards pertains to willfull infringement: “Modify the patent law doctrine of willful infringement Based on a quick reading there apparently is a lot of opposition to the House bill. RE:
Cha-Ching.. Nokia new 3G handset. Nokia unveils new 3G phone model All Reuters NewsHELSINKI (Reuters) - The world's top handset maker Nokia unveiled on Wednesday a new third-generation (3G) Nokia 6288 slider phone model, with two cameras and able to play videos. The phone is expected to begin shipping in the third quarter and retail for 325 euros ($412) before subsidies or taxes.
Posted by: rmarchma Mschere re ODM paying royalties when manufacturing for a paid-up OEM. I did not really get an answer to that particular question. An excerpt from my latest conversation with Janet as follows:
However ODM licenses can also be structured to contain “carve-out” provisions, whereby the royalty will be shared by both the ODM and the licensed OEM. These carve out provisions can vary greatly as to the royalty obligation of the ODM and the royalty obligation of the licensed OEM. In some cases most of the royalty can be paid by the OEM and a small part passed through to the OEM, or the ODM could pay a small part of the royalty with the majority being paid by the licensed OEM. Different royalty rates would apply to the ODM under the different scenarios. I tried to get clarification on the question about an ODM, who has some type of carve-out provision to share royalty, selling to a paid-up or fixed royalty licensee of IDCC. I don’t think she had really thought about this, and seemed not to be to sure of her answer. Her tentative response was that she thought that the ODM would still be liable to pay only its part/share of the royalty, even though the licensed OEM would not have to pay anything additional for its respective part. I noted that I use to think that whoever put its brand name on the handset would be the party responsible for paying the royalty. This certainly does not necessarily appear to be the case any longer. Janet said that things are changing. http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=12472787
Posted by: mschere Zapping the Competition
How companies are using obscure standards-setting bodies to cripple new technologies and hog-tie rivals.
For centuries obscure standards-setting groups have convened to decide on life's little details: a uniform thread count for nuts and bolts, a uniform diameter for a light bulb socket. More recently standards groups helped usher in the cheap-PC revolution, standardizing the way disk drives and memory chips communicate, helping make them commodities. Now what used to be boring, technical affairs are increasingly riven with accusations of corporate skulduggery and fraud. The reason is that the rewards are bigger than ever. Patent-holding tech companies rely on market-defining standards to rake in huge royalties or lock out competition. Qualcomm, the archetype of a successful patent-licensing company, exploded onto the tech scene after it legitimately embedded patents into early cell phone standards; last year it took in $2.5 billion in royalties. Now the lure of similar riches threatens to corrupt all sorts of new standards and rob consumers of the next generation of cheap technologies, either by strangling them in their crib, indefinitely delaying their development or simply hiking their price. While commercial motives have always played a role in shaping new technology standards, it used to be done in an upfront and "gentlemanly" fashion, says Paul Nikolich, who oversees wireless standards at the IEEE. Now more companies hide their commercial motives from one another, he says, whether through intentional omissions or outright lies. "It is the erosion of transparency that seems to be causing problems these days," Nikolich says. In August the Federal Trade Commission ruled on one of the longest-running standards fights--and the first really ugly one. It found unanimously that chipmaker Rambus (nasdaq: RMBS - news - people ) of Los Altos, Calif. had broken the law when it deceived a standards body in a bid for billions in patent profits. Rambus had filed for a range of patents that ended up in the new standards for fast-memory chips, then ignored rules requiring Rambus to disclose them. At the standards meetings the Rambus group continued to cover up the existence of its patents, the FTC found, undercutting the group's agreed-on goal of limiting patent-holders' power. As the standards took shape, Rambus engineers played even dirtier, amending their patent applications to make sure that they would cover even more of the standards, according to the FTC. Once their intellectual property had been slipped into the standards, Rambus began charging a royalty rate of 3.5% on memory chips. That rate was an abuse of market power deriving from its earlier lies, the FTC ruled. It violated both the Sherman Act and the FTC Act, which bar monopolistic tactics. The FTC is considering possible sanctions. Rambus disputes the findings and plans to appeal. In another dispute also involving Qualcomm, fellow chipmaker Broadcom (nasdaq: BRCM - news - people ) accuses the company of abusing standards set by a different body, the International Telecommunication Union. In this case Qualcomm got its patented material included in the ITU standards fair and square, then reneged on its commitment not to abuse that power, Broadcom alleges. Before patented material is included in a standard, the patent-holder typically agrees to make licenses available on "fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms." Broadcom argues that Qualcomm's charges are unfair. It says that when Qualcomm owned 80% of the key patents in the previous standard, it billed phonemakers a royalty of around 5%. In the new generation it controls just 20% of the patents in the standard--and still charges the same amount. Qualcomm retorts that simply counting patents gives a misleading impression and that its royalties meet the "fair and reasonable" test. Last month a U.S. district court judge dismissed Broadcom's complaint, saying that even if true the behavior wouldn't violate federal antitrust laws. Broadcom says it plans to refile the suit. The ongoing Mobile-Fi fight is messier still. Last year Qualcomm found an alternative way to respond to the threat posed by Mobile-Fi: It spent $800 million to buy Flarion, a company that owned key patents that will likely help define the new standard. Qualcomm then went from accused to accuser, claiming that Intel (nasdaq: INTC - news - people ) was trying to kill or delay Mobile-Fi by stacking the standards group with people loyal to its interests (sound familiar?). Intel's motive, says Ronny Haraldsvik, a marketing executive at Qualcomm, was to protect Wi-Max, yet another wireless standard. Nonsense, scoffed Intel, saying it's happy with all wireless systems because they boost sales of its laptop chips. Steve M. Mills, who heads the IEEE standards process, is preparing new rules aimed at curbing the hanky-panky, such as disclosing conflicts of interest. One can only imagine the jockeying that will ensue. http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2006/1002/044a.html?partner=yahoomag mschere
Posted by: H42 InterDigital Files for Patents, Targets Korean Mobile Phone Companies By Kim Won-seok Friday, September 15, 2006
InterDigital Communications, known as a mobile phone patent hunter, is increasing the number of patent filings in Korea, especially filings on 3G (WCDMA/HSDPA) technologies. The Korean patent agency has been less cautious about granting patent licensees to foreign firms unlike its American and Japanese counterparts seeking to delay filings or examining cases more carefully, inviting the concern that the agency needs to take into account national interests. The number of patents held by InterDigital in Korea surged from 24 cases in 2001 to 1,275 in the end of June this year. The company filed 72 cases in 2002, 182 in 2003, 227 in 2004 and 521 last year, doubling the number every year. "InterDigital has filed for patents that are almost considered standards such as spread spectrum," said Gang Hee-gok, investigator at the patent agency. "This year, it has filed for patents on frequency interference-related technologies used to boost data transmission speeds." Such technologies are widely used in the industry, and demand is expected to increase. Patent filings have centered on 3G and 4G technologies in the wireless communications area this year. If WCDMA technology is registered, InterDigital will likely claim its royalty earnings against Korean mobile phone companies right away. Foreign firms like InterDigital also claim a comprehensive intellectual property right when they file for a patent. And industry experts say that the government needs to revamp the patent law by considering the nature of the IT industries such as mobile phones instead of merely seeking to shorten the patent registration period of foreign firms. While the authorities in the United States and Japan begin examining cases 2 years after filings, the patent agency in Korea begins in less than 10 months. "Until the early 20002, it takes 3 to 4 years to win a patent license from filing, but now it has been shortened to about a year," said an industry expert. "Foreign firms stand to benefit from such an environment in the mobile phone area, where technologies are revolving fast." "In Japan, there has been no registration in the MPEG area for almost a decade," said a patent attorney. "Patent registration procedures take much time in Europe and the U.S., too." http://english.etnews.co.kr/news/detail.html?id=200609150005
abridged post WL: RIMM (Blackberry) and HTC (manufacturer for Palm) are InterDigital licensees Shipments of Converged Mobile Devices Hit New Record High in Second Quarter of 2006, Says IDC FRAMINGHAM, Mass.--(Business Wire)--Sept. 12, 2006--
"That quarterly shipments are reaching the 20 million unit mark in a single quarter is a significant milestone," said Ramon Llamas, research analyst for IDC's Mobile Markets team. "As recently as two years ago, it would have taken an entire year to ship that kind of volume. Since then, the converged mobile device, or smartphone, has evolved in terms of functionality and appeal. In addition, as functionalities have increased, prices have decreased, making converged mobile devices not just attractive, but affordable."
Posted by: lastchoice Date:9/12/2006 3:05:00 PM thanks, o'dog. it's (new Palm - see below) to be a strong seller, with an high ASP. more good news for a current licensee. Billion--with a ''B''
WL: Licensee HTC manufacturers phones for Palm Palm Introduces Windows Mobile-Based Treo 750v Smartphone for Vodafone Customers LONDON--(Business Wire)--Sept. 12, 2006-- Palm Experience Delivered on Windows Mobile
Posted by: olddog967 plfm: Here is data as of Dec 31, 2005. For more current info on US patents, you can go to IDCC web site (below) and count them. Our Patent Portfolio http://www.interdigital.com/tech_products_patents.jsp RE: jimlur how many patents does IDCC currently have? eom.
Post is abridged IDCC licensee Sierra with a nice Cingular win. Cha ching. Cingular Adds Sierra Wireless AirCard(R) 875 Wireless WAN LaptopConnect Card to its 3G Device Portfolio Tuesday September 12, 9:30 am ET LOS ANGELES, Sept. 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - Sierra Wireless (NASDAQ: SWIR - TSX: SW) and Cingular Wireless today announced the availability of a new LaptopConnect card, the AirCard® 875, the most advanced 3G PC Card based upon the GSM global wireless standard. The card is also the first commercially available HSDPA 3.6 Mbps network card in the Americas.
Posted by: mschere Yes..When "we" (IDCC) sell the stack" For Integration in THIRD PARTY baseband"..Unless you think INFINEON has an exclusive and IDCC Dual band protocol software is Limited to Infineon Basebands only.. RE: mschere
Posted by: mschere My comment..Old Research coming home to Roost, which can only aide IDCC in further 3G Licensing. 3G IPR: A Great Mobile Mystery Wireless Equipment 25 January 2005 The wireless industry kept 3G IPR a dark secret,hidden behind a heavy curtain of NDAs. For such an important topic, the lack of disclosure is itself frightening. While investors largely see one company benefiting (i.e., Qualcomm), this position may change in '05 when the ramp of 3G has staggering commercial implications.Many 3G licensing agreements are yet to be negotiated and there are far more IPR holders in WCDMA than GSM, with many existing solely to press patent claims.Some think "market forces" will resolve this but with $5bn-$10bn at stake, this is wishful thinking.The problem is complicated by software and multimedia functions in phones, adding CE IPR claims. Handset vendors lacking IPR to trade (many Asian OEMs) may struggle to make money if cumulative WCDMA royalty rates are 15-20%.Finally, operators subsidising 3G handsets see IPR as another cost to cut: can they do so by applying their purchasing power?Is today's royalty regime unsustainable? +++ It may be built on overly generous definitions by patent holders of what is "essential IPR", while some licensees may be trapped in licensing deals signed years before 3G was standardised. A showdown is brewing between IPR holders supporting a 5% cap on royalty, and other patent holders pressing claims in isolation.None is willing to quantify what "fair and reasonable" WCDMA royalty rates are for specific patents.We see the IPR mystery being solved in two ways. One is by basing royalties off PC card ASPs(i.e., modem), not on wider handset prices (i.e.,loaded with colour displays, CE functionality and brand value). The other is from anti-trust approved patent licensing arrangements, representing a large proportion of essential patent owners and, importantly, operators. +++ If Nokia or Motorola is influenced by operators to join such schemes, a 5% royalty cap (or some similar limitation royalty rate) may gain wider acceptance, sparking an industry-wide deflation of IPR value.Either way, no serious OEM can afford to ramp 3G handset units in '05 without solving this mystery: who owes how much for using which patents? Where's the Evidence? We highlight our 3G forecast (shipments and wholesale ASPs) over the next five years; these totals, $185bn in handset sales coming from 860m units.Any IPR holder that gets even a fraction of a percent stands to gain. Qualcomm is clearly positioning itself for this windfall, claiming it will receive a royalty rate similar to CDMA 1X from all 3G handset vendors (which we compute to be 4.65%).This would translate to over $8bn of royalty revenues ($7bn of profits)based on our five year forecast. Unsurprisingly,Qualcomm does not support industry proposals to cap cumulative royalty rates (even if many industry CEOs do). Their argument is that no other cost item has such a limitation on pricing, so why cap IPR? Yet, there are few choices in licensing technology.Qualcomm had the foresight to agree favourable terms with some handset OEMs (some with "indefinite"agreements).A test case as to whether these are excessive surely beckons. Various independent studies attempted to judge which of the thousands of patents filed are "essential" to the 3GPP standard. While it is almost impossible to quantify the value of each individual patent, several industry studies (i.e., by PA Consulting, the Chinese MII and others)suggest the largest share of essential IPR seems to lie with Nokia, Ericsson and Motorola, followed by Qualcomm,Siemens and others.The Europeans, equally, were the most involved in 3GPP standards efforts. Even so, Qualcomm's stance on royalty demands – a fixed rate for use of any patents - has become a reference point for all patent holders. If we assume Qualcomm sticks to an imputed 4.65% rate, why should patentholders, equally convinced they have portfolios of "essential IPR", settle for less? For those with IPR and a handset business, it can be an easy way to dampen rivals' margins.Many have invested heavily in R&D to develop the WCDMA standard.The question of IPR market share will have to be resolved by some ostensibly "independent" ruling on the importance of patents. Who decides on which IPR is truly "essential" or attaches a value to specific patents? It is not enough to say that past agreements – signed when the industry was far smaller – determine future royalty rates. The evidence offered by many companies about WCDMA agreements remains scant. Many companies - Siemens, Alcatel, InterDigital, NTTDoCoMo - also have wide portfolios in specific - and equally important – niche areas. If Ericsson,Motorola, Nokia and others adopt Qualcomm's stance on IPR, the cumulative royalty rates could far exceed 20%, all but killing off new entrants (i.e., with no 3G IPR). Lawsuits aside, investors often ask how this might get resolved.After all, assuming agreements are watertight, extend into perpetuity and favour a few IPR holders (the dominant perception), what can change? We see two areas where the industry might claim licensing terms should be redrawn. Up For Interpretation The first major change needed is 3G royalties should no longer be based on a percentage of handset ASPs. This has Under this scenario, Flextronics or ODMs might face IPR claims, but net royalty payments would be substantially lower. After all, why should Nokia or Motorola pay royalties on brand value it brings to its 3G handsets. In consumer electronics, this concept of valuing IPR on a portion of the device has long been established with efforts from MPEG LA and other standards bodies. WCDMA royalty payments should Join the Club Could operators cajole the last few "top-tier" handset OEMs to join this licensing programme, particularly as operators play a greater role in setting handset specifications? We understand the GSM Association has recently undertaken work to reduce IPR costs and is known to be sympathetic to the WCDMA Patent Licensing Programme.Its role here should not be underestimated. Such moves increase pressure on Qualcomm – and others - to lower royalty demands,some of which may be bundled with chipsetpricing.If 80-90% of essential patent holders sign up to licensing deals supporting the 5% cap or a similar royalty/unit cap for terminals, a single company demanding a similar rate for a smaller share of 3GPP patents is sure to be tested. If Nokia's stance with InterDigital or Vitelcom is anything to go by, 3G handset vendors think they can solve this mystery themselves. mschere
Posted by: Learning2vest Took a step back after reading Tom Carpenter's comment about how the Nokia/QCOM dispute over 3G licensing rates could be creating some "uncertainty"(i.e. IMO he is implying "delay") in the Nokia/IDCC 3G license negotiations. Wanted to see if I could figure out what Tom's logic was in forming that opinion. Best support I've found so far comes from reviewing the two major arguments Nokia has been making all along regarding IPR licensing rates for 3G; i.e., 1)that there should be some agreed cap on the total IPR licensing costs for each standard, and 2) that the rates paid to license each firm's IPR contributions to the standard should be directly related to the proportion of that total IPR they actually contributed. My understanding of those arguments is that Nokia wants the industry to agree on a total "cap" number(let's use 10% as an example) for ALL of the IPR in a standard, and then for the players involved to divide that number up among themselves based on the proportion of patents they each contributed to the total.(i.e., in our 10% cap example, if they contributed 25% of the IPR, they should expect to license it for 25% of the agreed 10% cap, or 2.5%) Back when QCOM launched the initial IS95 CDMA standard they licensed basically 100% of the IPR needed to build it for a flat 5% rate. That was a sweet deal for manufacturers given what the rate totals are on standards like GSM and W-CDMA today. I'm guessing that the issue Nokia/QCOM are hung up on today over 3G licensing is the fact that QCOM still wants the same 5% flat rate for a W-CDMA license when they may have only contributed something like ~25% of the total IPR necessary to build products compliant with that standard. When you compare getting "100% of the IPR for 5%" with only getting "~25% of the IPR for the same 5%" it's the same thing as raising the "price per patent" by 400%, and the price for 100% of the IPR from a 5% cap to a 20% rate cap. Yikes! No wonder Nokia is still haggling with the Q. And maybe Carpenter's logic is based on an assumption that Nokia wants to get the 1 to 2% IDCC is asking for by getting QCOM to play the "proportional" game. My take on that line of thinking is for Nokia to complete a "proportional" 3G license agreement with IDCC very soon and then be able to use that as another example of how QCOM's 3G rate demands are out of proportion with their contributions.
Posted by: mschere The End of Samsung's MFL 2G PLA and 3G claim is less than 72 Hours old...and many Investors are clueless as to why IDCC Management PAID for the termination of Nokia's 3G MFL rights..IMO:Samsung will not post the required Bond to appeal the Arbitral Monetary Award, when it is reduced to a Final Judgement.Samsung fought a good fight to obtain 3G rights from IDCC and failed, they will now negotiate.Unlike Nokia who has no current WCDMA handset sales in the U.S., Samsung does. Some very positive statements, and some very negative ones. Though, this is the most negative I've seen (analyst) Tom (Carpenter) to date. With the end of 2006 quickly approaching, the need for a new 3G license does loom large...fortunately, not as large as a few months ago before LG (which will keep us positive regardless) mschere
Posted by: j70k The major showdown in 3g is now centered on the concept of fair and reasonable rates for ipr. If you are strategizing for the remaining large oem's and you know that you will have to include IDCC in the mix, does it make more sense to negotiate a contract similar to LG structure before dealing with qcom in the courts, (giving everyone a measuring stick of number and quality of essential patents translating to a fair and reasonable rate) or is it more prudent to deal with qcom first, with the distinct possibility that paying IDCC after qcom's rates are established would cost more in the long run-not to mention infringement risks? Since qcom is trying to hang on to a concept similar to their cdma monopoly rates, I believe that a new way of structuting ipr is what the large oem's are after and that they will dea with IDCC first, to set a precedent and put pressure on qcom to reduce their rates. JMHO
Posted by: mschere OLD WCDMA handset sales news..(some (posters here) have a greatly exaggerated concept of how many (3G devices) have actually come to market to date) 2004 WCDMA handset sales..(45 Million WCDMA handsets sold in 2005, with almost 1/2 in Japan) Earlier this year LG Electronics landed a deal to supply 3 million units of WCDMA handsets to Hutchison. LG Electronics also won a contract from Orange to supply WCDMA handsets, the company announced on September 7, 2004. Although the order quantity is not as large as that of Hutchison, it is meaningful that LG Electronics won an additional supply contract of WCDMA phones. According to Strategy Analytics, LG Electronics, which began delivery of WCDMA handsets to Hutchison in April 2004, is the world's second largest supplier of WCDMA handsets in the second quarter 2004. It supplied 900,000 WCDMA handsets and scored a 21.4 percent market share. The world's largest WCDMA handset supplier was NEC, which shipped 1.3 million handsets (30.8 percent). Motorola was in third place, delivering 600,000 WCDMA handsets (14.2 percent) in the second quarter. Panasonic supplied 500,000 sets (11.9 percent), Nokia supplied 300,000 sets (7.1 percent), Sony Ericsson supplied 200,000 sets (4.7 percent), and Siemens supplied 10,000 sets (0.1 percent). LG Electronics is also going to supply a CDMA2000 1x EV-DO handset, the VX300, to Verizon soon. It will be the first EV-DO model exported from South Korea. LG Electronics' rival, Samsung Electronics, has been supplying a small quantity of WCDMA handsets on a trial base to Vodafone and Orange. When Europe's leading mobile service operator, Vodafone, scales up its WCDMA service at the end of 2004, Samsung hopes to export a large volume of its WCDMA handsets. Samsung Electronics plans to commercialize five models of WCDMA handsets in 2004. South Korea's third largest handset supplier Pantech & Curitel showcased a WCDMA handset at ITU Telecom Asia 2004 in Busan. It plans to commercialize WCDMA handsets in 2005. SK Teletech, which is planning to break into the North American handset market in 2005, is negotiating an EV-DO handset supply contract with Verizon. SK Teletech's representative commented, "Verizon representatives liked some of the several handset models we showed to them." Among the 3G wireless handsets, the WCDMA phone market will pick up its momentum this year when Hutchison, Vodafone and Orange scale up their services. The WCDMA market is expected to achieve an annual growth rate of 57 percent. The WCDMA handset demand is forecasted as 14 million units this year and 200 million units in 2008. WCDMA handsets are expected to account for over 50 percent of all handsets in 2010.
Posted by: revlis KOREA: Mobile Internet to become faster than fixed line http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=52060
WL: Philips is partnered with InterDigital in chip development
Junko Yoshida http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=192500877 An IDCC bag holder
Posted by: mschere Motorola says 2006 won't be breakthrough yr for 3G
HELSINKI, Dec 20 (Reuters) - Mobile handset maker Motorola Inc. (MOT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) predicts increasing sales of 3G mobile phones in 2006, but does not expect it to be a breakthrough year for the 3G mobile market, the head of its mobile phone unit said. "3G services are not yet at the level that they necessarily would require high-speed data transfers," Ron Garriques, Motorola's president of mobile devices, told Finnish business daily Taloussanomat in an interview published on Tuesday. "Sales of 3G handsets will certainly grow next year, but it will not be a breakthrough." Garriques said 3G handsets still had some way to go in improving their technology. "Chips are not yet small enough and they don't guarantee a small enough consumption of electricity. In addition, the cost structure in 3G phones is not as efficient as in GSM and EDGE handsets," he said. Garriques said Motorola, the No. 2 global cellphone maker, aimed to improve its distribution chain, to help it better compete with market leader Nokia (NOK1V.HE: Quote, Profile, Research). "We have the best products, Nokia has a better distribution network. The question is now can we build just as efficient a chain of distribution before they get to our level in their phones," Garriques was quoted as saying. He also said Motorola aimed to make a new line of cheaper, candy-bar-style handsets to boost its line-up for emerging markets, traditionally seen as Nokia's strongest area mschere Posted by: revlis rmarchma, I hate to disagree with you on your post especially since it is pro IDCC. Just because a company signed a 3G license with IDCC does not mean IDCC have essential patents. IDCC could have patents that are commercially useful to that company but not to other companies. I know what you are saying. The fact that so many companies licensed with IDCC means that IDCC have many useful patents that could be essential and that these many companies valued. mo revlis
Posted by: sjaym Heartland Fund-From Philadelphia Inquirer 8/13/2006 Wireless and computer-software companies paying off
The fund returned 7.6 percent through Aug. 9, the fifth-highest among 138 funds that focus on smaller companies and search for stocks considered inexpensive based on earnings and other measures, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Heartland Value trailed most of its peers the last two years. It is up 12 percent in the last 12 months. Nasgovitz raised the fund's holdings of technology companies to 19.9 percent of assets as of June from 12.8 percent in December. "Technology is under pressure and out of favor," Nasgovitz, 61, said in an interview from the offices of Heartland Advisors Inc. in Milwaukee. "It's a mirror image of what we had six or seven years ago, when the Internet, media and technology were the frenzy."
The median market value of companies in which Heartland Value invests is $192 million. The fund had 225 holdings as of June, and industrial and information-technology companies made up almost 42 percent of assets. Two years ago, Nasgovitz was the second-worst performer among small-capitalization value managers. The fund returned 9.1 percent, 13 percentage points less than the Russell 2000 Value Index. Nasgovitz, who comanages the fund with Brad Evans and Hugh Denison, blamed the weak performance on technology and health-care holdings. The fund produced a 2 percent return in 2005, ranking 109th of 130 competing funds and lagging behind its benchmark by 2.8 percentage points. Heartland Value returned an average of 16 percent in the last three years, trailing almost two-thirds of its peers. In 1983, Nasgovitz founded Heartland Advisors, which now oversees $2.9 billion, and started the fund the following year. He has put $9.6 million of his own money in Heartland's funds. Nasgovitz buys the "smallest of the small," typically companies with market values of less than $1 billion. He targets those with little or no debt whose shares trade at no more than 14 times his estimate for next year's earnings and less than seven times their cash flow. Heartland Value may be getting too large to stay with smaller companies, said Marta Norton, an analyst at Morningstar Inc. The fund closed to new investors in November 2003, with $1.7 billion in assets, and reopened a year later. "The size makes it a little more difficult to get in and out of positions," she said. Closing the fund again "should be on their radar screen." Norton said she was also concerned about regulatory issues at Heartland Advisors. In 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission accused the firm of fraud for mispricing two high-yield municipal bond funds. The case is in federal court in Milwaukee. "We deny the claims," Nasgovitz said. As for closing Heartland Value, the firm would consider curbing new deposits again if the fund became too unwieldy, he said. Nasgovitz lifted the fund's stake in its largest holding, InterDigital, to 5.7 percent of assets at the end of June from 3.6 percent in December. It was the only stock that accounted for more then 2 percent of the fund. Nasgovitz added $3.37 million of stock in First Consulting, based in Long Beach, Calif., during the first quarter. Its shares are up 40 percent this year. Taking advantage of share declines in the technology industry, he also raised the fund's stake in Tier Technologies Inc., a technology consultant. Shares of the Reston, Va., company retreated 26 percent this year. Heartland Value Fund Fund managers: Bill Nasgovitz, Brad Evans, Hugh Denison. Assets under management: $1.78 billion. Performance: Up 12 percent in the last 12 months. Significant holdings: InterDigital Communications Corp., First Consulting Group Inc., Tier Technologies Inc.
post abridged WL: LG is licensed by IDCC for both 2G and 3G LG - Listed as 4th largest cell phone maker: Aug. 11--Few U.S. cell phone users had heard of the LG brand five years ago, but the company made headway despite cutthroat competition, and today its sleek handsets are practically everywhere. LG -- now the world's fourth-largest cell phone maker -- shipped 55 million cell phones worldwide last year. Its brand name resonates with 60 percent of Americans and extends beyond cell phones to refrigerators with built-in TVs, front-loading washing machines and 71-inch plasma televisions.
The brand's rise from obscurity can be attributed, in part, to LG Electronics' U.S. headquarters in San Diego. There, LG develops and markets the company's cell phones for North America. The phones, perhaps more than any other LG product, increase name recognition for the company. "When I first started, I said my job was to get people to stop saying, 'LG who?'" said Jon Maron, senior director of marketing for LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., in Scripps Ranch. The $25 billion LG Electronics business and its San Diego cell phone operation are an increasingly important part of South Korea's $87 billion-a-year LG, a 59-year-old conglomerate that makes everything from cosmetics to air conditioners. Earlier this year, the Strategy Analytics market research firm dubbed LG the "the fastest-growing mobile phone brand in North America." "The mobile phone has really become one of LG's strongest businesses," said Sean Ryan, an analyst with market research firm IDC of Framingham, Mass. LG was once known as Lucky GoldStar, a brand that consumers correlated with low quality. But then the conglomerate changed its name to its initials, overhauled its image and took on Korean electronics giant Samsung. "They're bitter rivals," said Michael King, a San Diego-based analyst with Gartner market research firm. "They're both Korean and both selling to the same (geographic) market." When Samsung entered the cell phone market, LG jumped in, too. As a late entrant in 1996 on its home turf in Korea, LG was "reasonably successful," said Juno Cho, president of LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A. in San Diego. Going global was another matter. By the time LG got around to entering the U.S. cell phone market in 1998, Samsung already had a foothold. LG located its U.S. headquarters in San Diego to be near wireless giant Qualcomm and to draw on the region's pool of workers with expertise in the wireless industry. It worked its way into the U.S. market by making cell phones that use code-division multiple access technology, developed by Qualcomm. About one in five phones worldwide are CDMA phones. Verizon Wireless and Sprint are among the U.S. wireless carriers whose networks operate on the technology. Korean wireless carriers use CDMA, so LG was used to the technology. That made it easier for the company to penetrate the U.S. market, but the transition to selling phones in the United States wasn't seamless. LG executives had been used to Korea, where cell phones operate on one bandwidth and cellular antennas are close together to cover the country's densely populated areas. In the United States, cell phone networks operate on an array of bandwidths, and the sprawling country is not as buried in antennas, said Cho. LG engineers had to learn a whole new set of technical specifications. "It was an adventure for us," he said. For the first few years, LG made phones bearing the brand of U.S. wireless carriers. Corporate executives were convinced in 2001 that they were ready to put their own name on the product, and LG launched its own brand -- a clamshell phone with dual LCD screens that LG says was the first of its kind in the U.S. Later, LG extended its reach with cell phones that ran on the competing technology GSM, or global systems for mobile communications. As U.S. phone sales grow for LG, so does its San Diego operation. The company started eight years ago with just 10 employees; now it has 268. The engineers work with wireless carriers so that LG's phones meet their specifications, and also test phones. "We would come to a complete standstill in the United States if we didn't have these people here," said Maron, the marketing director. "Right now, LG's motto is fast execution, and how we get to fast execution is by offering our customer, the wireless carriers, what they need, when they need it. You can't do that if you have to fly in from Korea each time." Last year, LG converted its original building into a research and design center to focus more on customizing its phones for the American market. The sales and administrative force moved to a nearby building. The company has earned a reputation in the industry for fast turnaround and going the extra mile for wireless carriers.... LG Electronics Chief Executive Ssang Su Kim has said his goal is to turn LG into the third-largest electronics firm in the world by 2010. The company is making headway in cell phones: LG is now the world's fourth-largest maker of cell phones with a 7 percent market share, trailing Samsung in the No. 3 spot. "They've both taken the approach of a very aggressive global push, particularly in the U.S. market," IDC's Ryan said. LG has a way to go to catch up. Samsung shipped 29 million cell phones worldwide in the first three months of this year -- almost twice the number of LG shipments, according to IDC. No. 2 cell phone maker Motorola shipped almost three times the number of phones that LG did in the first quarter, and Nokia, in the No. 1 spot, shipped five times the LG total. LG's latest sensation cell phone is Chocolate, a slider with a retractable keypad and controls that glow red. The phone has unique touch-sensitive controls instead of buttons. Chocolate was rolled out earlier this month by Verizon Wireless in an exclusive offering. More than 1 million Chocolate phones sold in the first eight weeks of Chocolate's May rollout in Great Britain, China, Russia, Mexico and several other countries. "Chocolate for LG is a global phenomenon," Maron said. "It will completely change the way consumers think about and touch their mobile phones. And it literally will change the way we think about design and structure and function of a cell phone." Copyright (c) 2006, The San Diego Union-Tribune JL
Posted by: revlis Samsung Hopes Partnership With Sprint Will Boost U.S. Presence http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aHAsDkyVJ.x8&refer=asia revlis
Posted by: revlis Motorola Gains Share In 2Q At Samsung, LG Expense -iSuppli http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dynamic/News.php?NewsID=39653&lang=fra&NewsRubrique=2 revlis
Posted by: Bill Dalglish olddog Thanks! IDCC won't sue anyone until another top 6 manufacturer has licensed 3G. IMO. Such a top 5 license, added to already licensed royalty arrangements, would set a very clear standard for what, in a competitive environment, the 3G royalty should be. Your # 12 of factors set out by the court for determining fair royalties: 12. The portion of the profit or of the selling price that may be customary in the particular business or in comparable businesses to allow for the use of the invention or analogous inventions. With a Motorola, Samsung, Sony-Ericsson, or Nokia -- plus already licensed LG --(plus all the other smaller licensees) royalty rates in hand -- it would be pretty clear what a fair royalty for 3G would be. Bill
Posted by: olddog967 my3sons. While you might be correct in regard to normal patents, an antitrust problem arises when patented material (an essential patent) is incorporated into a standard. Since the patent holder has a government granted monoply related to the use of the patent, there is a need to balance the rights of the patent holder with the rights of others to implement the standard. The requirement to license essential patents at fair and reasonable royalties rates, is the way of resolving this problem. As to what is a fair and reasonable royalty rate, the standards bodies don’t define it and it can be a matter of contention. In regard to a court setting royalty rates an academic study that I previously posted found that “The average royalty rate, granted in all reasonable royalty cases is 13.42% of the price of the infringing product. This number will strike many patent lawyers is surprisingly high; very few patent licenses negotiated without litigation (or even in settlement of it) result in royalty rates anywhere near that high.” In regard to the basis for establishing a rate the study stated the following: A. Legal Standards for Reasonable Royalties
The patent statute provides that a patentee can recover its lost profits from infringement, if it can prove them, but is always entitled to no less than a reasonable royalty. Lost profits are difficult to prove, and any patent owner who does not sell goods in competition with the defendant will be unable to demonstrate lost profits from infringement. Their only loss is the royalty for which they could have licensed the patent. How does a court determine what royalty is reasonable? In a case called Georgia Pacific v. United States Plywood, the court set out a detailed test designed to emulate the bargain the
These are the 15 factors set out by the court:
2. The rates paid by the licensee for the use of other patents comparable to the patent in suit. 3. The nature and scope of the license, as exclusive or non-exclusive; or as restricted or non-restricted in terms of territory or with respect to whom the manufactured product may be sold. 4. The licensor's established policy and marketing program to maintain his patent monopoly by not licensing others to use the invention or by granting licenses under special conditions designed to preserve that monopoly. 5. The commercial relationship between the licensor and licensee, such as, whether they are competitors in the same territory in the same line of business; or whether they are inventor and promoter. 6. The effect of selling the patented specialty in promoting sales of other products of the licensee; that existing value of the invention to the licensor as a generator of sales of his non-patented items; and the extent of such derivative or convoyed sales. 7. The duration of the patent and the term of the license. 8. The established profitability of the product made under the patent, its commercial success; and its current popularity. 9. The utility and advantages of the patent property over the old modes or devices, if any, that had been used for working out similar results. 10. The nature of the patented invention; the character of the commercial embodiment of it as owned and produced by the licensor; and the benefits to those who have used the invention. 11. The extent to which the infringer has made use of the invention; and any evidence probative of the value of that use. 12. The portion of the profit or of the selling price that may be customary in the particular business or in comparable businesses to allow for the use of the invention or analogous inventions. 13. The portion of the realizable profit that should be credited to the invention as distinguished from non-patented elements, the manufacturing process, business risks, or significant features or improvements added by the infringer. 14. The opinion testimony of qualified experts. 15. The amount that a licensor (such as the patentee) and a licensee (such as the infringer) would have agreed upon (at the time the infringement began) if both had been reasonably and voluntarily trying to reach an agreement; that is, the amount which a prudent licensee-- who desired, as a business proposition, to obtain a license to manufacture and sell a particular article embodying the patented invention-- would have been willing to pay as a royalty and yet be able to make a reasonable profit and which amount would have been acceptable by a prudent patentee who was willing to grant a license http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/stacking.pdf. RE: DO I go to court and tell the judge that you are over charging for the product. No. Why, because I am getting my fair and reasonable fee for my product. I have set the fee based on my costs.
WL:Panasonic is an IDCC licensee Posted by: revlis
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Board=news&Number=24792 revlis
post is abridged WL:Panasonic is an IDCC licensee Posted by: olddog967 A couple of more tidbits regarding Panasonic revenue and warrants Based on the following statement, Panasonic’s 2nd qtr recurring revenue payment can be calculated to be $3.6 million. ($120 million x13% =$15.6 million - $12 million (prior period) =$3.6 million) “In first half 2006, 65% of our total revenue, or $228 million, was associated with the resolution of a patent licensing matter with Nokia. Of the remaining 35%, or $120.2 million, 68% was from companies that individually accounted for 10% or more of this amount and included LG (21%), NEC (19%), Sharp (15%) and Panasonic (13%). “ A slightly larger amount ($3.8 million) comes out if you do the same type of calculation based on 2nd qtr revenue numbers. “In second quarter 2006, 77% of our total revenue, or $228 million, was associated with the resolution of a patent licensing matter with Nokia. Of the remaining 23%, or $68.6 million, 73% was from companies that individually accounted for 10% or more of this amount and included Panasonic (23%), LG (21%), NEC (17%) and Sharp (12%). In second quarter 2005, 70% of our total revenue was related to NEC (36%), Sharp (20%) and General Dynamics (14%).”
Post is abridged WL: Philips Semi is in a chip development partnership with InterDigital for NEXPERIA Note the reference to NEXPERIA ..Interesting who might be interested and how it may impact IDCC. AUGUST 2, 2006 Europe What Are KKR's Plans for Philips Semi? The semiconductor industry has always required a strong stomach and deep pockets. It's notoriously cyclical and, except for lucrative corners like PC processors, profit margins tend to be fairly low. Apparently, that's not a worry for top-tier private-equity firms Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Silver Lake Partners, and Dutch firm AlpInvest, which late on Aug. 3 sealed a deal to acquire a majority stake in Philips Semiconductor from its Dutch parent company for an eye-popping €8.3 billion ($10.6 billion), including €4 billion in debt. Question is, what draws KKR and company to this treacherous arena? And why have the private-equity firms gone to the mat to fend off two other investment consortiums—one reportedly including Blackstone Group, London's Permira Advisors, and Texas Pacific Group and the other including Apax Partners, Bain Capital, and Francisco Partners—to win this prize? Especially when KKR may be overpaying for Philips Semiconductor by as much as 15%, according to analyst estimates. Announcing the deal, Egon Durban, a managing director of Silver Lake Partners, said that the consortium sees great untapped potential in the unit. "The business is well positioned to pursue and achieve significant expansion," Durban said in a press release. The group will continue "building value through a demonstrated commitment to innovative technologies." Semiconductor industry experts figure the new owners aim to unlock hidden value in Europe's third-largest chipmaker by boosting profitability and selling off select assets. With €4.6 billion ($5.8 billion) in sales last year, Philips Semiconductor would be a top-10 maker on its own. But it is dwarfed inside sprawling Philips, which logged 2005 revenues of $38.6 billion. The unit, which has swung between profits and losses in recent years, is among the most diversified chipmakers in the business. It supplies components used in everything from Dell (DELL) PCs to Mercedes (DCX) cars to Nokia (NOK) mobile phones. It also has a long tradition of innovation, having supplied other Philips divisions with the electronics that powered historic breakthroughs such as CD players and DVDs.
Such intellectual property might be more valuable if it were fully separated from the rest of Philips, analysts say. "The jewels are there; they just need to be polished up," says Malcolm Penn, director of semiconductor research at Future Horizons in Sevenoaks, England. The new owners may have trouble finding immediate opportunities for polishing, though. After the tech downturn of 2000, Philips cut jobs and R&D spending at the money-losing chip unit and moved to more manufacturing outsourcing through partners such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSM). Philips also sharpened its focus on growing markets where it had expertise, such as wireless and automotive. The unit finally returned to profitability in 2004 after three years in the red and made €209 million ($265.4 million) in operating income on sales of €2.44 billion ($3.1 billion) in this year's first half. Even so, Philips announced in June its intention to cut the division loose for a possible sale or IPO. FIRMS TEAM UP AGAIN. As a result of its efficiency drive, Philips Semi had first-half operating margins of 8.6%. That's higher than the 6.4% earned by Europe's largest chipmaker, Geneva-based STMicroelectronics (STM), which offers a similarly diversified product line to the same broad market segments. But it trails behind U.S. rivals such as National Semiconductor (NSM) and Freescale Semiconductor (FSL), which had a first-half operating margin of 14.7%. Bringing profitability up to the level of U.S. counterparts is likely a top priority for KKR.... For all the ostensible merits of Philips' chip unit, there's no escaping the fact that the semiconductor industry remains highly volatile. Global chip sales are expected to grow an estimated 10.6% this year and 8.9% in 2007, according to Gartner Dataquest Research. While KKR and Silver Lake have obviously done their homework, the move is still a gamble. "It's late in the up cycle to be buying, and they could be sitting there in 18 months wondering what to do," says Sean Murphy, an analyst with Nomura International in London. It might be time to stock up on the antacids. Norton is a BusinessWeek.com correspondent in London mschere
Posted by: olddog967 For anyone who wants some quiet weekend reading relative to the negotiation of patent royalties, here is a recent academic study on the subject. While it contains some economic theory and modeling formulas (which I skipped over) it has intersting information in regard to injuctions, royalty stacking ( multiple patent owners), and determining reasonable royalties. It also has two case studies. One being on 3G, with reference to the Goodman-Myers report which has previously been posted; and the other on WiFi with some interesting comments. http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/stacking.pdf. or an easier to read HTML version; http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:Nu47Jyt1YIcJ:faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/stacking.pdf+Paten...
Posted by: Ellix In reply to: rmarchma who wrote msg# 164078 Thanks for the info. You have more profound questions than any of the so-called "professional analysts". You are able to probe deeper into the complexities of the issues. If we get some of these questions resolved maybe the analyst estimates could have less divergence.
Posted by: rmarchma Olddog re threshold provision in the LG license I think that your interpretation and explanation makes a lot of sense. I look forward to your additional thoughts on the NEC-Siemens JV.
Ron: As I have said in the past, although the announcement may have been poorly worded, IMO there is no question that the so called “threshhold amount” only applies to infrastructure.
“InterDigital Group Non-Assert. Provided Licensee is not in default under this Agreement, InterDigital Group hereby covenants not to sue Licensee and/or its Affiliates for infringement of the Licensed Patents for the development, design, manufacture, having manufactured (to the extent substantially designed by Licensee and/or its Affiliates), use, importation, Sale, or other distribution of up to (but not exceeding) an aggregate of [***] of Licensed cdma2000 Infrastructure (inclusive of Sales prior to the Effective Date), but only if all of such activities occur in [***]. For the avoidance of doubt, this non-assert does not extend to the [***] or its activities regardless of whether such joint venture qualifies as an Affiliate hereunder.” Except for the above clause, the license does not mention infrastructure. In fact, the basic license grant wording only covers terminal units. “Grant. To the extent Licensee has paid each installment of the License Fee as set forth in Section 3.1 herein and all royalties as set forth in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 herein (to the extent applicable) and provided Licensee is otherwise not in default under this Agreement, InterDigital Group hereby grants to Licensee and its Affiliates a non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide, royalty-bearing license under the Licensed Patents to develop, design, make, have made (to the extent substantially designed by Licensee or its Affiliates), use, import, sell, and otherwise distribute Licensed Terminal Units, alone but not in combination with other third party equipment, including the right to procure components therefore. In addition, provided Licensee is not in default under this Agreement at the end of the Term, Licensee shall be fully paid-up under and for the life of the Licensed Patents as to GSM Licensed Terminal Units only at the end of the Term.” I believe the purpose have having the so called “threshold amount” for infrastructure was to cover existing infrastructure sales at the time of license signing, and to require the LG-Nortel JV to obtain a separate license for future infrastructure sales. A definitive agreement for the LG-Nortel JV was signed on August 17, 2005, and the JV was launched on November 3, 2005. All of LG’s infrastucture business was transferred to the JV. All of this happened shortly before IDCC’s license was signed with LG, and had to be taken into consideration during the negotiations. Since Nortel is the controlling JV partner with ownership of 50%+1 share and has board control , it is not considered an affiliate of LG under their license. The JV therefore requires a separate license to avoid infringement. Although the name has been redacted, it is obvious that this is specifically covered by the last sentence wording in the above non assert clause. I have some additional comments on the NEC-Siemens JV, that I will furnish later.
Posted by: loophole73 Ronnie Good work. I come away from your discussion more confident in the accuracy of my two conclusions. The first is just how difficult it is to forecast earnings for IDCC. The LG license makes it very easy for the front money, but very difficult with respect to LG's future success. The ODM licenses may be very inconsistent moving forward and each may have special provisions which will make royalty obligations hard to gauge from just a gross sales numbers. I hope that IDCC continues to license under the LG model because it creates a predictability that can only err on the under side. The second is that IDCC insiders were not acting independently in this last window period. I believe that the group was getting together with strategy discussions for taking some off the table for very legitimate reasons. The USA and its market and financial institutions are in the middle of very serious and dangerous environments around the world. Any number of events can put the entire world at war. There is absolutely nothing wrong with our insiders converting a percentage of their assets to cash. Though the timing may have been bad for the shareholders, the product division sputter, the ICC dilly dallying and no new licenses at the signing stage created a window for our insiders to sell significant portions of their portfolios to secure the immediate future of their families. I know I have done the same over the past 6 months selling some other stocks and real estate holdings. I did not sell any IDCC, but I cannot fault any that have. MO
Posted by: rmarchma Olddog re the NEC-Siemens JV Thanks for posting, that helps. More than likely IDCC never licensed the NEC-Siemens JV, but rather the individual companies. It was the individual companies that retained the manufacturing of the 3G infrastructure and not the JV itself. Therefore, it would seem that the Nokia-Siemens infrastructure JV shouldn't directly impact IDCC's 3G infrastructure license with NEC. However indirectly this may impact NEC's 3G infrastructure sales, as they will now have to compete against their former partner, who is now aligned with the Nokia bully. Talk about birds of a feather flocking together. Nokia and Siemens might just end up back-stabbing one another to death.
Posted by: rmarchma WL: See new MANAGEMENT Best Posts for Part 1 of Ronnie Marchman's excellent discussion with Janet Conversation with Janet Point Friday afternoon Part 2 5. Does LG’s fixed royalty include a threshold level on handsets, or does the threshold level only apply to CDMA20000 infrastructure, as the public disclosure on this was unclear by its sentence structure? The public written statement is all the disclosure that IDCC has made at this point. Janet said that she could not tell me exactly what the threshold provision applied to. I was somewhat stunned by this, and replied that you can’t clarify a written public disclosure when the sentence structure is unclear and confusing. Does the threshold provision apply only to the (b) part of the sentence (CDMA2000 infrastructure), or to both the (a) part of the sentence (handsets) and to the (b) part of the sentence (infrastructure). She said IDCC could clarify this only through another written public statement. I said: suppose that the LG threshold provision only applies to CDMA2000 infrastructure, and that LG were to actually sell more CDMA infrastructure than the threshold, then would IDCC be entitled to additional royalty from LG. Janet said that she could not answer that either, because IDCC has not publicly disclosed exactly what the threshold provision entails. Boy talk about getting nowhere. 6. IDCC has licensed ODMs like Arima who manufacture for some of IDCC’s licensed OEMs, including Sharp, LG, and SE. Who pays the royalty on these handsets, the licensed ODM or the licensed OEM? What if the ODM sold to a licensed OEM of IDCC, who had a paid-up or fixed royalty contract, then who is responsible for the royalty? The licenses with ODMs can be very different and can contain numerous variations as to royalty obligations. One type of ODM license could require for the ODM to pay IDCC royalty on all handsets that they make, even if it is subsequently sold to a licensed OEM. In this case the licensed ODM would pay all the royalty and not the licensed OEM. I then asked that wouldn’t IDCC prefer the royalty at the OEM level, since the subsequent selling price by the OEM is greater than the selling price by the ODM. She said that this factor is considered in setting the royalty rate of an ODM, who is required to pay royalties on all handsets they manufacture. However ODM licenses can also be structured to contain “carve-out” provisions, whereby the royalty will be shared by both the ODM and the licensed OEM. These carve out provisions can vary greatly as to the royalty obligation of the ODM and the royalty obligation of the licensed OEM. In some cases most of the royalty can be paid by the ODM (WL: corrected version of post) and a small part passed through to the OEM, or the ODM could pay a small part of the royalty with the majority being paid by the licensed OEM. Different royalty rates would apply to the ODM under the different scenarios. I tried to get clarification on the question about an ODM, who has some type of carve-out provision to share royalty, selling to a paid-up or fixed royalty licensee of IDCC. I don’t think she had really thought about this, and seemed not to be to sure of her answer. Her tentative response was that she thought that the ODM would still be liable to pay only its part/share of the royalty, even though the licensed OEM would not have to pay anything additional for its respective part. I noted that I use to think that whoever put its brand name on the handset would be the party responsible for paying the royalty. This certainly does not necessarily appear to be the case any longer. Janet said that things are changing. 7. There is a lot of Joint Venture activity going on in the wireless industry. How does this affect an existing IDCC license, when the licensee subsequently joins into a new joint venture with another manufacturer? Who is responsible for JV royalties and who does IDCC have to license, the JV itself or the individual companies comprising the JV? How will the new Siemens/ Nokia infrastructure JV impact IDCC and the previous NEC/Siemens infrastructure JV? I was trying to get an idea as to how JVs work in general as to royalty obligations and licensing. I noted that IDCC had directly licensed the Sony Ericy JV, but it appeared that we really didn’t have a license with the NEC/Siemens JV itself, but rather with NEC primarily. We did have an old license with Siemens which paid them up on IDCC’s patents applied for up through 1999, but none thereafter. Janet first addressed the issue of an existing licensee who subsequently joins a new JV. She said that most of IDCC’s licenses have a provision for merger, acquisition, and change of ownership. I got the impression that the licensee’s royalty obligation would remain intact and just carryover into the new entity. We then turned the discussion to the issue of the NEC/Siemens 3G infrastructure JV, and how the new Siemens/ Nokia infrastructure JV would impact NEC and IDCC re 3G infrastructure. She said that they are really not sure. This scenario was not specifically addressed in the contract language as to what would happen if there was a change in the NEC/Siemens JV infrastructure partnership. I’m still very unclear on this issue and its possible impact. I’m also still somewhat unclear as to how JVs work in general regarding licensing and royalty issues. 8. Within the last several days, it has been reported that Phillips sold its chip division to a private venture. How will this change impact IDCC and its chip contract with Phillips? Will IDCC have to renegotiate a new chip contract with the new private owners? Janet said that Phillips has had its chip division, including the wireless communications chips that IDCC is working on, up for sale for some time now. At this early point, IDCC is viewing the relationship as being unchanged by the change in ownership. Therefore, I get the impression that IDCC feels that the current license will just carryforward intact to the new owners, without the need to modify or renegotiate.
Posted by: rmarchma Loop you're welcome. One thing confusing about the 2G and 3G breakout came from a comment by Merritt in the CC. Merritt said that 85% of IDCC's $54.9 recurring royalties in the second quarter came from licensees who had 3G licenses. However that particular comment did not mean that 85% of the recurring royalty revenue in the second quarter was from 3G, as several people wrongly interpreted.
Posted by: loophole73 Ronnie Thanks, the approx 55 mil in recurring revenue is very solid and this should grow naturally with increased 3g production ahead. This company is in great shape from the balance sheet to the operations. MO
Posted by: revlis Bill,
InterDigital Signs Sierra Wireless, Inc. to Worldwide 2G and 3G Patent License Agreement Therefore IDCC will collect royalty on every one of these cards. revlis RE: Is Sierra Wireless licensed with IDCC yet for 3G? If so, I assume they would pay royalties on each such card sold? Thanks, revlis, for your excellent continung detective work on our behalf! Bill RE: http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=6522
Posted by: revlis mschere, From the article: BenQ Mobile aims to become one of the world's top-four handset vendors, moving up from fifth position in the first quarter of 2006. My comment: Here I was going to give up on BenQ. This has renew my interest in BenQ. mo RE: (abridged article)
Celia Lin and Daniel Shen, Taipei; Jessie Shen, DigiTimes.com [Thursday 3 August 2006] BenQ's announcement yesterday of a change in representation on AU Optronic's (AUO's) board of directors has stimulated market speculation that the relationship between BenQ and Quanta Computer will become closer as Quanta Computer's vice chairman and president, CC Leung, has been appointed to the AUO board. The speculation is that Quanta Computer may indirectly take over part of BenQ's shareholding from Acer, which in April lowered its stake in BenQ to 4.98% and announced the resignation of its representative from BenQ's board of directors. There is also speculation that BenQ and Quanta Computer may cooperate on production of notebook PCs, mobile phones and LCD TVs. http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20060803A2006.html
Posted by: mschere Motley Fool
Swedish mobile-phone equipment maker Ericsson (Nasdaq: ERICY - News) has reported a quarter of slow sales growth and lower earnings year over year, yet the stock remains about as buoyant as it was before the report. Some companies would have been found at the bottom of a convenient river wearing concrete boots with results like that, but not Ericsson. What gives? To begin with, the earnings drop was entirely expected. In fact, analysts were looking for net earnings per share of SEK 0.35, a bigger drop than the SEK 0.36 that the company actually delivered. And if you back out charges related to the integration of British phone network builder Marconi, there was a slight uptick in profits after all. That's a start, but it still doesn't fully explain the market's complacency in the face of slower organic growth over last year. That's where a couple of large equipment and service orders come in handy. Brazil's largest cellular phone service provider, Vivo Participacoe (NYSE: VIV - News), just placed an order for 1.1 billion reals' (about $500 million) worth of next-generation network equipment, with an option to upgrade to even newer standards later on. That sale didn't count against the completed quarter's earnings but will contribute next time around. And Ericsson seems to be the target of a certain gang mentality, as long-standing rivals Nokia (NYSE: NOK - News) and Siemens (NYSE: SI - News) have decided to combine their network divisions in a joint venture meant to better compete against Ericsson's market mastery. It's a situation reminiscent of Motley Fool Stock Advisor selection eBay (Nasdaq: EBAY - News) seeking partners to protect itself against a perceived onslaught from Google (Nasdaq: GOOG - News) earlier this year. It's tough to be the king sometimes, but it looks like Ericsson is handling itself rather well; it remains poised to pick some more low-hanging fruit in developing countries with budding cell phone markets. The company forecasts a global market for 4.5 billion cell phones by 2012. If that holds up in reality, it's time to grab a fruit basket and keep on picking. And that goes for all of the handset and network makers, not just Ericsson. eBay is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor pick. mschere
Posted by: mschere Pantech Curitel is the 7th largest Global handset vendor.
04.07.06 SEOUL -- Pantech Group - the number two mobile phone manufacturer in South Korea - today announced its new ‘Hero’ EV-DO handset, a multimedia powerhouse model which is expected to become available in the U.S. this spring. The ‘Hero’ will be offered in the U.S. by mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) Helio, a joint venture between Korean mobile operator SK Telecom and Internet service provider EarthLink Inc., and will be a high end phone in the Helio portfolio when it launches its new mobile service this spring.
The new slider handset, on display at CTIA Wireless 2006, is designed with a jet black finish and is a virtual mobile entertainment center with a substantial 2.2 inch LCD display, industry-leading audio capabilities with full duplex stereo speakers and a 2.0 mega-pixel camera for capturing pictures or video. Sung Kyu Lee, President & CEO, Pantech Wireless, Inc., said: “We are excited about the U.S. launch of the ‘Hero’ for a range of reasons. First, we believe that the new phone will be of particular interest for U.S. consumers, with its stylish, attractive design and its wide range of multimedia functions”. “Second, we believe that our relationship with Helio will play a big role in building our brand in this market. Working with an MVNO like Helio will help build the awareness and credibility of the Pantech brand in the U.S.,” said Mr. Lee. The ‘Hero’ packs a co-processor chip that can provide high-quality music and video for an exceptional entertainment experience, allowing for extraordinary versatility in content and services. The phone also offers a powerful 70 MB memory along with external capacity. Pantech plans to ramp up sales in the U.S. by 20% in 2006, through a greater focus on developing its brand awareness in the market place and an increase in direct supplies to major U.S. service operators. The company expects to increase direct supplies to service operators in the U.S. by up to 70% this year through Pantech Wireless, Inc. About Pantech: RE:
Posted by: mschere Korean Phone Makers Losing Steam By Cho Jin-seo Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics, the two largest handset makers in the country, both saw decreases in shipments in the second quarter, while their rival firms such as Nokia, Motorola and Sony-Ericsson all reported robust growth over the same period. According to market researcher IDC, the worldwide mobile phone market has expanded by 2.1 percent in the second quarter to 237.8 million units. But Samsung’s share took a gloomy 9.4-percent decrease during the period, as LG saw a 1.7-percent decrease. Two years ago, Samsung briefly outperformed Motorola to become the world’s No.2 handset maker just behind Nokia. However, it is now a distant third and is not likely to catch up with Motorola again, as its high-end, high-price policy misses out on the developing markets in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia. Samsung managed to hold 11.1 percent of the market in the second quarter, down from 12.5 percent a year ago. The result is in stark contrast to arch-rival Motorola, which gained 4.3 percent to hit a 21.8-percent share. Riding on the success of the RAZR handset, Motorola shipped a record-high 51.9 million units in the three months to June, creating an irrecoverable gap for Samsung. Meanwhile, LG slid from fourth place to fifth with a 6.2-percent share, as Sony-Ericsson passed it by with a 6.6-percent share. LG’s telecommunications division recorded operating losses for the second consecutive quarters as sales in North America dropped by one-third. Despite the disappointing results, the firms gave positive outlooks for the rest of the year when their next-generation handsets become widely available. ``Increase in demand is expected to accelerate in the third-quarter as the overall third-generation market grows and demand for replacements rises. Should sales of our `Ultra edition’ handsets gain traction, we expect both the volume of sales and sales price to see significant improvement,’’ Samsung said in its second quarter earnings report. LG is betting on its ``black label’’ series, often dubbed as the chocolate phone. ``The black label series and follow-up model CDMA and GSM phones in Korea and overseas markets will be the key to further success,’’ the company said. It is not only the two major manufacturers which have suffered. VK Mobile, a mid-sized mobile phone maker, filed for bankruptcy earlier this month, boding ill for the country's struggling cell phone industry. VK failed to repay its maturing debts worth about 1.78 billion won after failing to honor promissory bills for the third time in 10 days. Pantech, Korea’s no.3 vendor, is also on the verge of collapse _ the company is expected to report a near-zero profit in the second quarter, if not a loss. indizio@koreatimes.co.kr 07-21-2006 18:06 mschere
Posted by: spider69 Motorola profit rises 46% Jul 19, 2006 WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Motorola Inc. on Wednesday said second-quarter profit jumped 46% as the company shipped a record number of wireless phones and benefited from a large one-time tax gain and a legal settlement.
Posted by: nokiashill motorola is gonna be today's darling it would be nice if idcc could sign them up for something
Posted by: Data_Rox good post on handset shipments http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22640176 IDC and Strategy Analytics on Q2 Handset Sell-in and Unit Share .... IDC has posted their prliminary estimate of Q2 unit sales and share. 'Others' looks high to me. Strategy Analytics sees it lower. They see global shipments at 235 million on a preliminary basis. Top 5 Vendors: Worldwide Mobile Phone Shipments and Market Share (IDC)
Mobile Phone Shipments Continue Robust Growth in the Second Quarter, According to IDC; Will 2006 Be a Billion Unit Year? IDC http://tinyurl.com/hdwta After an impressive first quarter, worldwide mobile phone shipments fell just short of an all-time high in the second quarter of 2006 with volume of 237.8 million units. The robust quarter was enough to boast a 2.1% increase from the first quarter, and 22.5% more than the same quarter one year ago. According to IDC's Worldwide Mobile Phone Tracker, 470.7 million units have shipped so far in 2006, which suggests that the industry may be close to shipping 1 billion units for the full year. "The industry has been eyeing the milestone of 1 billion handsets shipped in a single year for some time, and many believe 2006 will be the year it happens. However, while the first half of the year has been impressive, IDC does not see this milestone being surpassed this year," said Ryan Reith, research analyst for IDC's Mobile Phone Tracker. "Although the demand for handsets in emerging markets continues to soar, the market's surging growth rate has been balanced by slowing demand in select mature markets." While the majority of handset shipments were made up of entry-level devices, the second quarter also witnessed strong growth in handsets capable of utilizing bulked-up, third generation network infrastructure. With EV-DO and UMTS now common in the many regions throughout the world, 3G networks and services are becoming an increasingly significant part of the mobility world. The presence of established high-speed networks has resulted in the introduction of new handsets capable of video conferencing, internet access at broadband speeds, and real-time content sharing, all of which drove increased demand during the second quarter. "With a number of carriers marketing subscription services that take advantage of 3G's advanced capabilities, all of the major vendors are now offering 3G-compatible devices across multiple regions," added Reith. "There has been much talk about 3G being a standard, but that could only become a reality when carriers were able to market services that were appealing to consumers. With competitive services in place to drive usage on mobile phones for applications beyond voice, handset vendors are putting an increasing amount of resources into 3G handsets. Nevertheless, lower-end devices still make up the majority of the market." Vendor Highlights • Nokia: The second quarter proved to be another impressive quarter for Nokia as they posted 4.3% growth from the previous quarter and a 28.9% increase from one year ago, with an industry-leading 78.4 million units shipped. So far in 2006, Nokia has enjoyed the success of both the E-series and N-series device lines. Several product announcements during Q2 show that the E-series and N-series have the longevity to drive Nokia as an industry leader for some time. The worldwide leader in 3G handset shipments has leveraged these high end lines to continue as the leader in the next-generation technology, while not losing site of the important role they play in supplying entry level devices in emerging markets. • Motorola: The continued popularity of The RAZR produced another record quarter for Moto - the company's fifth straight - with 51.9 million handsets shipped. This was a sequential increase of 12.5% over 1Q06 and 53.1% growth from one year ago. The big surprise came from iDEN shipments, as Motorola announced a record quarter of shipments driven by new product releases in the first half of the year. • Samsung: The Korean based company took a 9.4% quarter-over-quarter decrease in 2Q06, with the majority of the loss coming from the EMEA region. With a number of 3G UMTS handsets launching across multiple regions in the second quarter, the time required for consumer adoption took a toll on device shipments. Despite the decrease in shipments from last quarter, Samsung did increase shipments into Asia/Pacific and the Americas, and worldwide shipments were up 8.2% from a year ago. • Sony Ericsson: The second quarter of 2006 proved to be a strong one for Sony Ericsson as it posted 33.1% year-over-year growth, passing LG Electronics to become the number 4 handset vendor worldwide. The company continued to build on the success of its Walkman-branded phones by launching a number of new devices, including the first UMTS Walkman phone (the W900), and announcing the W850, which will also be UMTS capable. • LG Electronics: A 1.7% decrease from last quarter was felt primarily in LG's CDMA handset shipments. In North America, which has historically been a strong region for LG, shipments dropped from 6.5 million units in Q1 to 4.3 million units in Q2. On a positive note, LG shipments of WCDMA handsets went up 170.0% in Q2, and HSDPA handset shipments into Europe, coupled with newly announced plans to ship into the U.S., accounted for the company's growth. Worldwide shipments were up 26.4% year on year - slightly ahead of total market growth. << Q2 Global Mobile Phone Share (Strategy Analytics) Nokia: 33.3%Motorola: 22.1%Samsung: 11.2%Sony Ericsson: 6.7%LG: 6.5%Others: 20.3% http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5197946.stm
Posted by: revlis IMO, loophole could be right. If you combine this story: LGT CEO Asked to Resign http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/tech/200607/kt2006071917471211780.htm with this story: LG Cell Phones Nose-diving, Again in the Red for Q2 LG Electronics incurred operating loss in the cell phone business in the Q2, for two quarters in a row. You could have the impression that LG whole mobile phone business is in trouble. We don't know who bought on the way up to $35 or who sold on the way down? But here is my response to loophole: loophole, You highlighted the bad news. The good news for IDCC is that Infineon is now the chip supplier for LG. Watch out for that relationship and any future impact on IDCC.
Here is my speculation: What if LG went to IDCC and wanted to renegotiate the license agreement but IDCC suggest an alternative, how to reduce the cost by buying the chip from Infineon. I would be very interested to know if Infineon is licensing the very same 2G legacy protocal stack as IDCC. mo
Post # 162539 IMO, loophole could be right. If you combine this story: LGT CEO Asked to Resign http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/tech/200607/kt2006071917471211780.htm with this story: LG Cell Phones Nose-diving, Again in the Red for Q2 LG Electronics incurred operating loss in the cell phone business in the Q2, for two quarters in a row. You could have the impression that LG whole mobile phone business is in trouble. We don't know who bought on the way up to $35 or who sold on the way down? But here is my response to loophole: loophole, You highlighted the bad news. The good news for IDCC is that Infineon is now the chip supplier for LG. Watch out for that relationship and any future impact on IDCC.
Here is my speculation: What if LG went to IDCC and wanted to renegotiate the license agreement but IDCC suggest an alternative, how to reduce the cost by buying the chip from Infineon. I would be very interested to know if Infineon is licensing the very same 2G legacy protocal stack as IDCC. mo
Posted by: rmarchma Mschere well hopefully possible 3G licensing with Samsung, S/E, and Motorola (and also include Nokia) will not result in one-time type revenues. They need to be structured as recurring per-unit royalties, or LG-type fixed royalties over future years. Ongoing recurring revenue streams produce much better stock price impacts, than do nonrecurring one-time type revenues associated with settlements and previous years true-ups. Perhaps I misunderstood your referenced post. Posted by: mschere Thanks for the quick and clear reply..IMO:That is why IDCC better have back to back to back Quarterly "one time event" positive earnings reporting such as Samsung, Motorola, Sony/Ericsson 3G Licensing etc.. RE: ...."Won't IDCC's 2nd Quarter net earnings (although highly Weighted by Nokia's 1X earnings event) still be considered the "GAAP basis" and thus be utilized by all the Stock reporting Services in establishing EPS?" Reported GAAP EPS will include the Nokia settlement and the Matsushita earnings associated with previous years. However the reporting services might adjust out those "one-time" amounts, and report an Adjusted EPS based upon their own calculations. That's what they did during the quarter in 2005 when much of the GAAP earnings per share was being generated by the income tax reversal. They took out the income tax reversal from earnings, and reported an Adjusted EPS. Therefore when the reporting services get hold of IDCC's GAAP EPS for the second quarter, they might make adjustments to the reported GAAP EPS, but they might not. I think they probably will though, at least for the Nokia settlement portion.
Posted by: Data_Rox loop - you're right, it's not rocket science....but there is business science involved in this argument. If NEC feels that their near term, 5 year, and beyond future in the handset and infra market is questionable, they will not opt for the LG deal that would put a lot of up front money on the table, but stay with their per unit deal. As mschere has shared before, NEC is shopping partnerships and other methods to expand their handset presence....they're also having to deal with the loss of their 3G infra partner Siemens....big questions out there as Nokia/Siemens take over responsibilities for the installed base of node b's.....and thus much of the new sales opportunities. Too many issues right now for NEC to see clearly enough to make that type of change to their IDCC contract. Many would really question NEC laying out a big up front fee until they have a better grasp on how they'll compete in the future. As I've stated multiple times....I LOVE the LG deal, it is a GREAT thing for IDCC.... The true measure of the LG deal should be measured by the reaction of NEC. If we see an exercise of the mfl clause by NEC, then we know that Data et al are correct regarding their assessments. If NEC remains status quo, then we know that IDCC negotiated a deal comparable to the NEC terms. There is no rocket science involved in this argument.
NEC's handset unit struggling Japanese vendor NEC Corp. may become the latest casualty in the hotly contested mobile-phone market. According to a Reuters report, the company is looking for some kind of partnership with another mobile-phone vendor in order to bolster its sluggish handset business. An agreement could involve anything from a development and marketing alliance to an all-out joint venture. An NEC spokesperson was not available to comment on the issue. ``They're one of the more public examples of the competitive challenges facing smaller vendors who elect to compete globally,' said John Jackson, a mobile-phone analyst with research and consulting firm Yankee Group. ``I see no imminent relief, and therefore expect consolidation and market exit will continue.' Mobile-phone makers Sendo and Alcatel Corp. already have exited the competitive handset space, he noted. NEC's troubles have been long in coming. Several years ago, the company was riding a wave of success with its Japanese handsets sales-such that it attempted a move into the lucrative U.S. market. The company signed a deal with AT&T Wireless Services Inc. to sell two advanced clamshell-style phones, but the partnership petered out when Cingular Wireless L.L.C. acquired the carrier. NEC has since given up on the U.S. market. More recently, NEC's sales in its home base of Japan have slowed significantly. As the Japanese market reaches saturation, the market's handset vendors have begun squabbling over each other's tenuous market position. Indeed, NEC's revenues from wireless declined 16 percent in the first six months of this year compared with last year. The company said it plans an ``early turn around' strategy for its mobile-phone business, one that includes a ``revision of development strategy' and an acceleration of its business in China. Part of NEC's cost-cutting strategy may involve teaming with other Japanese semiconductor companies, according to reports. Such a partnership would give NEC's struggling semiconductor business added heft. Due to the company's problems both abroad and at home, NEC's worldwide mobile-phone market share likely will clock in at 1.2 percent this year, according to Yankee Group, on sales of around 10 million phones. The number is down significantly from the company's 2004 market share of 1.8 percent on 13.6 million phones. Interestingly, NEC was at the forefront of the industry's move to W-CDMA. In the third quarter of 2004, NEC was the No. 1 supplier of 3G phones with a 34-percent global market share, according to research and consulting firm Strategy Analytics. However, with larger vendors ramping up their volumes, NEC dropped to the No. 3 position in the third quarter of this year with a 14-percent market share. ``This is a perfect example of the financial stress that 3G handset development can require of small companies without global scale,' said Chris Ambrosio, a mobile-phone researcher with Strategy Analytics. ``The challenges of ongoing product technology development, combined with increasingly stringent carrier needs for UI (user interface) and feature configuration, are putting heavy burdens on smaller vendors who want to compete beyond their domestic market.' As for NEC's hopes for some type of mobile-phone partnership or joint venture, Ambrosio said the company will have to aim high to succeed. ``Unless it is Motorola or LG, it is questionable whether they will be able to find a partner with advantages or resources that will be able to rapidly remedy this situation for them in 2006 or 2007,' he said.
Posted by: loophole73 Spencer The true measure of the LG deal should be measured by the reaction of NEC. If we see an exercise of the mfl clause by NEC, then we know that Data et al are correct regarding their assessments. If NEC remains status quo, then we know that IDCC negotiated a deal comparable to the NEC terms. There is no rocket science involved in this argument. The 2g argument is crazy from its inception. The greatest producer only had a 284 million dollar 2g tab. NEC paid around 81 mil. SNE and E together paid around 120 mil. LG did not come close to these companies' numbers. Their comparable 2g tab for TDMA/GSM is very small. The bulk of this deal is 3g related and based on a threshhold estimate over the 5 year period. Once they pay the 3 installments over a 2 year period, they will have a paid up 2g license. However, nobody is privy to the actual 3g terms. If IDCC is consistent, then this is another pre-payment discount based licensed. Whether or not true-ups or future credits apply for lesser than anticipated production exist is anybody's guess. Under the typical MFL clause, IDCC notifies the licensor (NEC) of the LG terms at the time of licensing. The licensor has ninety days to either opt to apply the LG terms to its license as a novation or remain status quo. Since the LG license was made and entered into in January of this year and we have seen nothing regarding an NEC option under its MFL clause in a PR, 8k, 10k or 10Q, I will let you be the judge regarding the 3g terms that IDCC negotiated with LG. Again, I urge all to let the company advise you via their reporting methods rather than a posters to this board when it involves material matters. It is much safer and far more accurate in the long run. MO
Posted by: mschere Wm. Merritt JUNE, 2006.. BILL MERRITT: With respect to Motorola certainly on 3G products they need to take a license under our patents, so they're one of those top six companies that we've been very focused on. The options for Motorola are like the options we have with other folks. It can be through straight up negotiations on the patents. It can be through a combination of patents and products or it could down another path. But certainly they are the company we need to deal with, with respect to licensing and we intend to [do it]. Any other questions? mschere
Posted by: lastchoice oh, yeah, and idcc's leadership and capability and ipr are at the core of 802.21, which is to automatically switch between all the "heterogeneous" networks. to develop hetero, they also were expert in homogeneous, how to switch APs within a network. the timeframe is much farther out than the rationalization of the whole 3g inevitability[/]. it will author the next stage of growth, and keep the royalty rates steady. if idcc has flat rate, and wireless weaving its dna into every system that exists, or will exist, the growth in units will handle everything else. feeding new developments into the license base will provide the value. and, wireless is the savior for the 2nd and 3rd world. it will bring remote area into the wide world. features sell 100,000,000s of millions of phones to people that own phones. feature additions are going faster than ever, because everyone can see the shear SIZE of the market. idcc currently has 35% licensed. could we please have anther 7.5-10%, please KoP? Billion--with a 'B' \ WL: Sharp and Kyocera and InterDigital licensees for 3G. My comment..Wilcomm utilizes Sharp Phones..They are co-owned by Carlyle Group
Sharp, Willcom unveil Nokia Communicator competitor The screen is capable of displaying 65,536 colours - plenty for quickly reviewing shots taken on the handset's 1.3 megapixel camera. Pics can be stored in the WS700SH's 64MB of RAM or with the 60MB of Flash memory available to the user - the OS gets the rest of the 128MB of Flash. If you need more space, the phone has a MiniSD slot.
Posted by: mschere IDCC was Issued FOUR NEW Fundamental UMTS cdma/TDD Patents today..Three were Applied for in 2000 and one in 2001! HELLO, Nokia/Siemens and Datang!!! mschere
Brazil map or user GSM continues its march across the South American CDMA landscape A couple of years ago the GSM Association made the following prediction about GSM technology becoming common place in what was then a CDMA stronghold - i.e. South America. "...That said, GSM handsets are still a comparative rarity in Latin America. But this will change rapidly for several reasons. First, many GSM networks are young and new ones are still coming on stream. The most significant of these is Colombia Movil which planned to launch its network before Christmas 2003. Second, GSM850 is starting to be deployed in earnest in North and South America. This will be vital to some TDMA carriers who do not have PCS spectrum but it will also provide spectral room for manoeuvre for major operators such as Telcel in Mexico and Telefonica Movil in Chile. Third, data services -SMS in particular -are becoming a differentiator in the mass market and this can only favour GSM carriers who will have a wider choice of handsets and applications. Driven forward by these factors, GSM is already the fastest growing technology in Brazil and Mexico and by 2007, forecasts Pyramid Research; it will finally dominate the region. Full GSM World article can be found +++here. http://www.gsmworld.com/news/media_2004/latin_america_article_wbr04.shtml I am not sure the claim "dominate the region can be levelled at GSM technology just yet - though Pyramid Research was talking about this happening in 2007 so we still have a year to go! However things are looking bright for GSM. Recently a new survey by GSA - the Global mobile Suppliers Association, confirmed that a number of CDMA operators are facing falling market share and responding by switching to the GSM family (GSM/EDGE,WCDMA-HSPA) for business growth. They said that some operators "...choose a dual system strategy, but most prefer to migrate their whole customer base to GSM, which is the global standard for mobile communications". Read full article here. The latest set back for CDMA - the technology most associated with Qualcomm, is in Brazil. MORE of this 3G Portal story here
WL: LG is licensed for 3G by InterDigital LG Releases WCDMA HSDPA Phones
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200606/200606280022.html Posted by: The_Net Qualcomm Resists Demands for Royalty Cut
Qualcomm, the San Diego-based wireless technology company, has been under pressure from Indian mobile phone companies to cut royalty fees from companies that sell phones based on a technology it helped develop, known as CDMA, or code division multiple access. Local companies say the fees in India are higher than those charged in China. But Qualcomm Chief Executive Paul Jacobs said the key issue was the cost of producing handsets. He said that such costs could be lowered with further research and development and that Qualcomm was looking to fund research work by public institutions in India with some of the royalties earned here. Qualcomm and the Indian companies won't disclose the rates, but industry experts say the company charges nearly 5 percent royalty on sale of CDMA phones in India compared to just 2 percent in China and South Korea. India contributes 2.2 percent to Qualcomm's worldwide royalty collection.
Posted by: olddog967
Grant. ITC hereby grants, and shall cause its Affiliates to grant, to "Covered Standards" means the following recognized digital cellular standards or other digital cellular specifications for digital cellular TDMA-based communications systems describing the air interface between infrastructure equipment and terminal units: TIA/EIA 54/136, GSM, GPRS, EDGE, PDC, PHS, and with respect to Covered Terminal Units additionally all other TDMA standards, as amended or enhanced from time to time (including TDMA based 2.5G, TDMA based 2.75G, TDMA based 2.8G, etc., but not Third Generation (other than EDGE)); provided, that in no event shall "Covered Standards" be construed to include any Excluded Standard. Unless this Agreement is sooner terminated, the license granted to Licensee under the ITC Patents with respect to Covered Infrastructure Units as set forth (and limited) under Article II shall be deemed fully paid up as of January 1, 2007 based on Licensee's remittance of all cash payments accruing under this Agreement.
Posted by: denos16
I only bring this up because I am trying to understand what lies ahead. It seems like there are so many possibilities, but I do not understand them all. I would appreciate any words of wisdom on the Ericsson front.
Posted by: The_Net 1. The main technical challenge in CDMA based technology is the POWER CONTROL! Does IDCC have essential patents? 2. The main technical challenge in ANY cellular system is to manage the INTERFERENCE! Does IDCC have essential patents? 3. The challenge in WCDMA is that the radio part must be harmonized in the three operational modes, FDD DS, FDD MC, and TDD. Does IDCC have essential patents in both FDD and TDD? 4. The WCDMA Physical Layer 1 is the radio access layer! Does IDCC have essential patents?
Posted by: rmarchma L2vest re IDCC's essential patent declarations to ETSI you said: ...."I forget the exact numbers rmarchma came up with at the time, but he verified that IDCC had only gotten around to declaring a very small number of it's essential patents before y/e 2004. The BIG NUMBERS of IDCC's 3G patent declarations did not show up until IDCC did an update to the data base in early 2005, a few months AFTER the cutoff date for that report." Your above dates are a little off, but the gist of your comments are correct. IDCC made two separate ETSI declarations of its essential/possibly essential patents in April 2001 and April 2004. The cut-off date for the referenced report was at the beginning of 2004, before the second IDCC declaration to ETSI, as follows:
As to the exact number of IDCC's declared essential patents to ETSI, from a previous post of mine replying to Data_Rox as follows: Posted by: rmarchma Rox re US essential patents declared to ETSI Thanks for the update and I stand corrected. IDCC did update its declarations to ETSI in April 2004, which I was not aware of until today. Now there are two ETSI declaration dates associated with the IDCC patents, 4/10/2001 and 4/8/2004. IDCC initially declared 69 essential US issued patents on 4/10/2001 to ETSI, comprised of 16 GSM/TDMA patents and 53 UMTS/CDMA patents. These patents are still listed under those same classifications. IDCC then declared 98 more essential US GSM issued patents to ETSI on 4/8/2004, which are classified under GSM only, not GSM/TDMA. Also IDCC declared 204 more 3G UMTS issued essential patents to ETSI on 4/8/2004 classified under UMTS only, not UMTS/CDMA. Thus the updated total is now 371 nonduplicated declared US (not worldwide) issued essential patents for IDCC, and 1 declared essential patent for Tantivy, as you so indicated. I am not so surprised by the large increase in 3G UMTS issued patents declared as essential to ETSI in April 2004. I figured these 3G patents would be forthcoming as they were subsequently issued by the US Patent Office. However, I am surprised by the large increase in the 2G GSM issued patents declared as essential to ETSI in April 2004. I thought it had been ages since IDCC worked on 2G. http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=4552258
Posted by: Learning2vest No doubt in my mind about IDCC having "the goods" in 3G. IDCC put it as follows in one of my favorite 10K references(liked seeing them list some of the specific functions under patent), and I believe them;
(3) “With respect to CDMA technologies we also have led industry innovation and patented our resulting CDMA inventions. Today we hold a significant worldwide portfolio of patents and patent applications for CDMA technology. Similar to our TDMA inventions, we believe that a number of our inventions are essential to the implementation of the 2G and 2.5G and 3G CDMA systems in use today. Our key CDMA inventions include or relate to (among others): ù Global pilot: The use of a common pilot channel to synchronize sub-channels in a multiple access environment ù Bandwidth allocation: Techniques including multi-channel and multi-code mechanisms ù Power control: Highly efficient schemes for controlling transmission power output of terminal and base station devices vital in a CDMA system ù Overlay techniques for communications systems, which allow new wireless systems to be deployed with existing wireless technologies without frequency allocation ù Joint detection and interference cancellation for reducing multiple access interference in a physical receiver ù Soft handover enhancement techniques between designated cells ù Various sub-channel access and coding techniques ù Packet data ù Fast handoff ù Geo-location for calculating the position of terminal users ù Multi-user detection(MUD)" "Based on our history of invention and our extensive participation in the standards bodies, together with extensive use of technology innovation across different standards, we believe that our patent portfolio, including patents applied for, is applicable to all of the air interface protocols described in the IMT-2000 standard." If somebody doubts those statements, ask them to explain why quite a few very competent wireless firms have licensed with IDCC for 3G? Do they think those firms decided to pay IDCC millions of dollars per year just because they trust what IDCC claims in a 10K? I don't think so. I think those firms did some strong due diligence before agreeing to license and start paying.
Posted by: xdx DR/Plumear: the target was not $1.50 at the ASM. The statement made by UB was that we were targeting between $1 to $2. The example he used was to reflect the total revenue impact to IDCC if we were successful in receiving a $1.50 per phone of the percentage (I think it was 60%) of 3G phones we were collecting royalties on.
Posted by: Data_Rox The Net....maybe a dozen RE:
Posted by: Data_Rox l2v Working off the U.S. Army's foundation patents in CDMA, QCOM proceeded to develop and commercially launch a "narrowband" CDMA wireless system designed for voice(i.e., IS/95).
Quite a bit after the Qualcomm work began IMM bought Dr. Don's company, and began to apply his, and Qualcomm's work (reference back to the surprising recognition that Dr. Don used Q's patents) to a wider implementation for WLL applications....the problem was that they had an implementation but the carriers lacked the spectrum, and the ecosystem to deliver the products. Today we know that the QCOM mobile voice system enjoyed great commercial success while IDCC's fixed location B-CDMA system did not find a market and was superceded by the firm's decision to move ahead in developing a "mobile" version of B-CDMA. This investor's thesis is that the air interface in what we know today as W-CDMA "FDD" has much in common with IDCC's development work on that "mobile B-CDMA" system. Actually, B-CDMA and today's WCDMA FDD implementations and underlying patents are quite different, thus IDCC's essential patent portfolio is quite small when compared to Nokia, Ericsson, Qualcomm and others. That bit of history gets interesting when we take note that both QCOM and IDCC proceeded to launch two very different commercial versions of CDMA wireless systems after their 1995 settlement. Apparently QCOM had all of the CDMA IPR they needed to commercially launch their "narrowband" CDMA voice system, AND more importantly, IDCC had all of the CDMA IPR they needed to commercially launch their "broadband" B-CDMA fixed wireless system. B-CDMA never became commercial beyond some trials....and again, if you review Qualcomm's patents they are not constrained to "narrowband", but quite often refer to "wideband" IMO that means the two firms had in effect "split the CDMA IPR deck" to suit their very different business objectives back in 1995. They went separate ways in developing commercial system applications of the U.S. Army's basic CDMA technology, and each firm patented the work they did along the way. ummmm...OK. How may patents were finally at issue with Qualcomm, before IDCC decided to settle? We know how many Qualcomm got access to, but how many were going to trial? As a result, QCOM has great IPR strength in "narrowband" CDMA2000 technology today while IDCC's IPR strength lies in "broadband" W-CDMA technology. Seems like there are two mutually exclusive CDMA patent portfolios that are to a large extent aligned with the wireless standards(there are exceptions of course, such as QCOM's "soft handover" patents which appear to be essential in all of the current CDMA standards). Again, Qualcomm's essential patents and work has NEVER been contrained to "narrowband"....as is a part of history now, the Euro cabal tried every which way to work around Q's patents for what they now recognised was the best method for 3G implementations, but to no avail. If that scenario is on target(?), it bodes well for IDCC's contribution value in 3G and also helps to explain the rate reduction pressure QCOM is currently experiencing re W-CDMA. The reason there is pressure is that in the "open" standards process, quite a few more companies participated to a greater degree, causing delays and higher royalty rates. Busy day today - I'll catch you later
Posted by: Learning2vest The most interesting thing about that 1995 CDMA IPR settlement and limited licensing agreement between QCOM and IDCC was what happened next IMO. Working off the U.S. Army's foundation patents in CDMA, QCOM proceeded to develop and commercially launch a "narrowband" CDMA wireless system designed for voice(i.e., IS/95). At the same time, IDCC used those U.S. Army foundation patents to develop and field test a commercial "broadband" CDMA fixed wireless system designed for robust transmission of packet-based data(i.e., B-CDMA). Today we know that the QCOM mobile voice system enjoyed great commercial success while IDCC's fixed location B-CDMA system did not find a market and was superceded by the firm's decision to move ahead in developing a "mobile" version of B-CDMA. This investor's thesis is that the air interface in what we know today as W-CDMA "FDD" has much in common with IDCC's development work on that "mobile B-CDMA" system. That bit of history gets interesting when we take note that both QCOM and IDCC proceeded to launch two very different commercial versions of CDMA wireless systems after their 1995 settlement. Apparently QCOM had all of the CDMA IPR they needed to commercially launch their "narrowband" CDMA voice system, AND more importantly, IDCC had all of the CDMA IPR they needed to commercially launch their "broadband" B-CDMA fixed wireless system.
IMO that means the two firms had in effect "split the CDMA IPR deck" to suit their very different business objectives back in 1995. They went separate ways in developing commercial system applications of the U.S. Army's basic CDMA technology, and each firm patented the work they did along the way.
If that scenario is on target(?), it bodes well for IDCC's contribution value in 3G and also helps to explain the rate reduction pressure QCOM is currently experiencing re W-CDMA.
Posted by: vtem01
Posted by: The_Net Moto(rola) is very high on my list of licensees. Many of the 90s executives of Moto have gone! Moto surely doesn’t want to have another fight with IDCC especially with Mr. “Pit Bull” Campagna for the 3G issues; IDCC’s 3G patent portfolio and the Company Financial are much stronger than at the time the 2G fight happened.
While Nokia sold 17% of 9 million WCDMA phones (1.53 Million) in the 2nd Quarter of 2005..IMO:They ended the Year with a total of 4.5 million vs. NEC, LG, and Panasonic's total of some 21 Million. Toshiba, Sharp and Sanyo sold almost as many WCDMA handsets in 2005 as Nokia...Nokia did take the lead again in the 1st Quarter 2006, however..Keep in mind that Mitsubishi and Fujitsui also sold some 4.5 million sets in 2005 and also need to be 3G licensed by IDCC..More than 1/2 of all WCDMA handsets sold globally to date were sold in Japan..and Nokia is new to Japan for 3G. Nokia Seizes Number One Position in Global 3G Wireless Phone Market 24 August , 2005 US : According to the latest research from Strategy Analytics, a total of 9 million WCDMA (3G) phones were shipped worldwide during the second quarter of 2005 (April to June). Nokia topped the list of vendor-rankings for the first time, with a 17 per cent global share.
Posted by: Desert dweller imo, the one new licensee we need more than any other is Motorola. If/when we sign them then the stock price is off to the races. IMO the street is holding us back and will continue to hold us back until Motorola signs. If somehow UB is able to ink a deal with them, I believe it will have a bigger impact to our stock price than a new license with any combination of the other top 6 including Nokia. All jmho. Hopefully we will see a new licensee soon even if just a smaller non top 6 player would be nice.
Posted by: mschere My comment..Pantech is the 7th largest Global handset OEM.. Pantech Supplies Cells to Cingular SEOUL (Yonhap) ㅡ Pantech, a small South Korean cell phone maker, said Thursday it has supplied camera phones to Cingular Wireless, the largest wireless carrier in the United States.
The C300 model, which is 0.76 inches thick, is the first Pantech-branded phone based on a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) technology, the world’s most-used wireless standard, the company said. Pantech plans to boost its sales in the U.S. by 20 percent this year, the company said, without providing yearly comparative figures and other detailed plans. 06-01-2006 mschere
Posted by: mschere Tom Carpenter believes that IDCC will sign Samsung, S/E and benQ, before year end..Both He and Merritt talk in terms of "Top 6"..While I think in terms of Top Seven which includes Pantech, which I believe is on the IDCC Licensing front burner.. http://wirelessledger.com/idccMay2006.pdf POLL: How many Top 5 3G licenses do you think IDCC will sign by the end of the year, and which ones do you think they will be?
Posted by: mschere Reports of death of 2G "greatly exaggerated" : Study
The says says that while the mobile telecom infrastructure markets in industrialised nations are close to or at saturation levels, vendors are well positioned to exploit new opportunities in places such as China, India, and other fast-growing markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America. It adds that while such markets present new challenges with their low wage and low price economies and are thus not able to leapfrog directly to 3G, manufacturers are meeting huge demand with more efficient and easily upgradeable 2G/2.5G networks. “The major infrastructure manufacturers have to be very clever in producing cost-effective 2G and 2.5G systems for developing markets, because there isn’t a lot of money to spend,” said ABI Wireless Infrastructure Research Director, Lance Wilson. iDEN is a 2G technology mschere Posted by: mschere My comment..This strategy proved to be a disaster for benQ..Perhaps HTC can pull it off since their current customers are Network Operators (other than UTStarcom) and benQ was a supplier to top tier names. HTC hitting out on its own
While stepping out under its own name, HTC said it would continue to provide products and services to its traditional carrier and OEM customers, which typically place their own brand on devices from ODMs such as HTC. Observers will be watching to see how effective the company can be in playing both roles, which conceivably could displease major customers accustomed to HTC’s anonymity. HTC joins Pantech Group and other high-volume ODMs that apparently concluded that to survive and effectively compete in a market increasingly dominated by the top half-dozen handset vendors, which together command about 85 percent of the global market, they must develop their own brand identity and communicate that to the public. HTC’s branding campaign will begin with two handsets: The “MTeor,” a slim, candybar-style 3G smart phone, and the “TyTN,” an enterprise device with tri-band UMTS capabilities that allows global roaming on GSM, GPRS, EDGE and Wi-Fi networks. mschere
Posted by: mschere IMO:Talk of IDCC licensing 3G with Nokia, Samsung, Motorola,S/E,Pantech and benQ is a legitimate subject of conversation, since I believe that InterDigital has stated that it is a major part of their Business Plan for 2006, which still has some six more months of Life. mschere
Posted by: dndodd
Posted by: lastchoice data, i'm of the opinion that asian countries often act as "birds of a feather." i wouldn't be surprised to see benq, and some remaining ODMs from taiwan. also, since LG signed, i think there is a chance that samsung will too, (pantech also). Billion--with a 'B'
Posted by: Data_Rox
MO, we're much closer to the smaller fish for overall licensing than the big ones for 3G, who may, and rightly so, wait for Nokia to flesh out 3G for them. Thanks loop - I'll be in your fair state later this month...but a couple hundred miles from you. Keep the faith brother....nice to see us charging back up past 31 again R
Posted by: Gamco Mobile body plans cheap 3G phones to boost take-up Tue Jun 13, 11:50 AM ET The mobile phone industry is planning to speed up the development of cheap, mass market 3G handsets to make mobile Internet and multimedia services available to more users, an industry body said on Tuesday.
Handset makers will then compete to design a 3G handset that meets the operators' common requirements and the GSMA will endorse the winning handset, which will be widely deployed by operators participating in the program. "Our 3G handset initiative will allow far more people to take advantage of the video clips, mobile music, Internet access, and many other multimedia services now enjoyed by more affluent users in the developed world," said GSMA Chief Executive Rob Conway. The GSMA said an earlier initiative to produce cheaper mobile handsets -- at under $30 apiece -- had been very successful, enabling millions of people in over 56 countries to start using phones for the first time. Gamco
Posted by: gman1962 from real money..... Tero Kuittinen
The situation is highly opaque, because all major agreements are secret and ongoing negotiations are not publicly discussed in any detail. We do know that Qualcomm has an excellent team of lawyers who designed the original licensing agreements specifically to protect Q from any future dilution - even when original patents expire. But we also know that no company has ever succeeded in avoiding gradual dilution of licensing fee levels in the consumer electronics space. Situation is gnarly, because prior telecom IPR battles have always been resolved relatively smoothly - as long as equipment vendors were main IPR holders, they have an incentive to make compromises and settle disputes. But Qualcomm is mainly an IPR vehicle; it has an incentive to avoid any compromises. Regardless of the outcomes of various disputes (vs. Nokia, vs. Samsung, vs. China) it seems possible that at least some companies involved may well decide to press on until last minute - i.e. the trial stage. This might mean that we face a year of legal and PR offensives, garnished with threats about injunctions and financial penalties. I don't think investors are prepared for this. The W-CDMA IPR situation particularly has been a sleeper issue that has surfaced periodically and always faded out as key decisions have been deferred into future. It could be a while until the market prices in various litigation risks and gets comfortable with the new, Red Alert phase of the IPR debate. Position: none
Posted by: The_Net
Mschere, that’s why (former CEO) Howard Goldberg claimed that IDCC has ENGINE and TRANSMISSION in 3G and (CEO) UB ("Uncle Billy" Merritt) said that IDCC will derive the revenues from every 3G terminal
Posted by: mschere FORM 10-K x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 InterDigital’s Technology Position Cellular Technologies
• Methods of synchronizing TD/FDMA systems • A flexible approach to managing system capacity through the reassignment of online subscriber units to different time slots and/or frequencies in response to system conditions • The design of a multi-component base station, utilizing distributed intelligence, that allows for more robust performance A number of our TDMA-based inventions are being used in all 2G and 2.5G wireless networks and mobile terminal devices.
• Global pilot: The use of a common pilot channel to synchronize sub-channels in a multiple access environment • Bandwidth allocation: Techniques including multi-channel and multi-code mechanisms • Power control: Highly efficient schemes for controlling the transmission output power of terminal and base station devices, a vital feature in a CDMA system • Joint detection and interference cancellation techniques for reducing interference • Geo-location for calculating the position of terminal users • High speed packet data channel coding • High speed packet data delivery in a mobile environment mschere
Converged Mobile Device Market Continues to Surge Ahead-IDC Friday, 09 June 2006
"In most mature markets, the first quarter of the new year is usually characterized by a sequential decrease in shipments. However, as a market with more growth on the way, the converged mobile device market was able to post sequential growth as well as a sizable year-over-year gain," said Ramon Llamas, research analyst with IDC's Mobile Markets team. "The worldwide market has broadened in terms of the number of vendors who have entered into this space, and deepened as far as the kinds of devices coming out for consumers, enterprise users, and fans of multimedia. The lure of new products combined with heightened competition among the vendors, should continue to drive the smartphone market to new heights." "Continuous upgrades to mobile operating systems have given device manufacturers more capable platforms upon which to create devices," says Ryan Reith, research analyst with IDC's Mobile Phone Tracker. "For example, Nokia set the bar by launching two new lines of devices for the converged market, the E-Series and the N-Series, aimed at two different end-user markets. These lines have plenty of room to grow and offer devices in the high, mid, and lower levels of the converged mobile device space, which should add pressure on other device manufacturers to follow suit in 2006." Nokia - After reaching a record level during Q4 2005 with 9.3 million units shipped, Nokia experienced a 12.2% decrease in shipments following the holiday quarter. Despite this sequential decline, Nokia enjoyed 49.9% year-over-year growth in the first quarter of 2006, capturing 43.2% of the worldwide market. Nokia augmented its broad lineup of devices in the first quarter with the introduction of several new multimedia-centric N-Series devices as well as its E-Series targeted at enterprise users.
Research In Motion - The Canada-based vendor of enterprise-centric BlackBerries posted a new record shipment volume to kick off 2006, its fifth consecutive quarter of sequential growth. After shipping nearly 1.5 million units, Research In Motion posted sequential growth of 12.4% over 4Q05 and year-over-year growth of 85.7%. By the end of the quarter, Research In Motion had earned 7.7% worldwide market share. Released by IDC WL ed: IDC is a matrket research firm, not to confused with IDCC) mschere
Posted by: Gamco 3G users up to 100M, and growing
More than 100 million mobile phone subscribers have signed up for 3G, enabling the wireless technology to reach an important "critical mass," said a Strategy Analytics report on Thursday.
"Much of this success is due to the strong pushes by influential carriers like NTTDoCoMo, Hutchison 3G and SK Telecom," said Sara Harris in a statement "and more recently Vodafone and Verizon Wireless, who have worked hard to drive 3G uptake among their subscribers." Harris is the senior analyst who authored the report. The market research firm said the US market is expected to grow rapidly next year when Cingular Wireless - the largest US mobile phone provider - deploys its HSDPA technology. Gamco
Posted by: ellismd Good for them! LG Ups Ante in Chinese Market By Kim Tae-gyu
LG plans to open its twin towers on Chang An Avenue in central Bejing as its commitment to the vast emerging market in China. /Courtesy of LG
``We do not see China as just a low-wage platform. The country is our second local market,’’ Pahk Yuhn-sihk, president of Beijing LG Building Development said ``As a result, we have constructed our group’s second headquarters here in Beijing and are looking to hold its grand opening ceremony this November,’’ Pahk said.
Woo Nam-kyun, president of LG Electronics China, stressed the towering building amply demonstrates how gravely the chaebol regards the Chinese market. ``Among the 500 biggest foreign companies in China, LG is the only player that has a building at the Chang An Avenue constructed with its own capital,’’ Woo said. ``This twin tower shows our sincere commitment to the Chinese market and we do not employ a hit-and-run strategy here as some other foreign companies do,’’ he added. In line with the opening of its second headquarters in Beijing, LG aims to become a premium brand with its two iconic subsidiaries _ LG Electronics and LG Chem _ leading the way. In particular, LG Electronics set an ambitious target to evolve into a leading electronics producer in China by 2010 on the back of such items as cell phones or digital TVs.
With its new ``chocolate phone,’’ LG KG90, gaining popularity after debuting here in April, despite its high price tag, LG, the world’s No. 4 handset vendor, plans to keep marketing expensive, full-featured phones. For the digital TVs, the company looks to pump out high-priced, flat panels like plasma display panels (PDP), TVs larger than 50 inches diagonally and 42-inch-plus liquid crystal display (LCD) TVs. Also included in their premium-oriented lineup in China are side-by-side refrigerators and top-line washers rather than traditional, single-door refrigerators and old-fashioned washing machines. voc200@koreatimes.co.kr 06-06-2006 19:45 Posted by: revlis
I also wonder about 3G infrastructure revenue. Perhaps it is so small by 2010 that it is not worth projecting. mo
Posted by: spencer I'm very curious about how much revenue IDCC can generate from 3G infrastructure. Interesting that IDCC has not made any predictions about that.
Posted by: mschere InterDigital will not receive royalty on this new RIMM device, until their existing license is upgraded to include 3G.. BlackBerry 8707 for 3G June 06, 2006
Europeans can now sleep a little bit easier because the BlackBerry 8707 has finally debuted for 3G this week. The 8707 is a slightly updated version of the 8700 that North Americans may be familiar with. In the traditional BlackBerry style, the 8707 comes loaded with a QWERTY keyboard, GPRS, Bluetooth 2.0 and EDGE, but it seems lack some important features. It does not have Wi-Fi and there are no options of expandable memory—just the 64MB of integrated flash memory. The 8707 operates on the Vodafone network.
Posted by: mschere
RE: QCT : Revenues $2.05B....EBT $552M This is their comment regarding QTL. Note the operating margin of 92% indicating that most royalty revenues come down to the bottom line. That is what we are looking for from IDCC for their new licenses. " QTL Segment. QTL revenues for the first six months of fiscal 2006 were $1.24 billion, compared to $893 million for the first six months of fiscal 2005. QTL’s earnings before taxes for the first six months of fiscal 2006 were $1.14 billion, compared to $805 million for the first six months of fiscal 2005. QTL’s operating margin percentage was 92% in the first six months of fiscal 2006, compared to 90% in the first six months of fiscal 2005. The increase in both revenues and earnings before taxes primarily resulted from a $344 million increase in royalties reported to us by our external licensees, which were $1.14 billion in the first six months of fiscal 2006, compared to $796 million in the first six months of fiscal 2005. Revenues from amortized license fees were $23 million in the first six months of fiscal 2006, compared to $34 million in the first six months of fiscal 2005. Other revenues were comprised of intersegment royalties." RE: mschere
Posted by: mschere My comment..The ASP of HTC devices are well over $300.. Buoyed by the launch of the StrTrk, HTC is expected to ship 12 million handsets in 2006, up from about 5-6 million in 2005, the paper noted. (WL ed: HTC is an InterDigital licensee) Posted by: mschere HTC signs MOU with DOPOD
The transaction details, the business cooperation plans, the rights and obligations of both, and other related affairs will be evaluated and negotiated in the near future.
Fully aware of the rapid growth of the global smart handheld device market, HTC and Dopod have decided to reinforce and expand their strategic alliance. Henceforth, after combining the world-class design, innovation, and engineering expertise of HTC with the brand awareness and marketing experience of Dopod, HTC will benefit from a much higher market and end-user awareness, and, in addition, its innovative products will reflect on Dopod's strong brand influence in Asia. As a result, Dopod will cultivate its brand management and marketing abilities to enhance itself in a branding market and will continue to create unique and high value-added products to strengthen its core competencies. HTC recognizes and anticipates the high synergistic potential that can be realized from this new level of cooperation. mschere
Posted by: loophole73 dboone "When I spoke with WM (CEO William Merritt) last year, we discussed generally the method which he seeks to license. My interpretation was that he wants clean licenses, without "triggers", based upon set unit amounts with an opportunity for us to do better if the customer does better." I agree with you and apparently so does the street. As of right now, the street believes that IDCC can make up the difference of the fading 2g royalties with the present 3g licensees. By way of example, if we land another 3g contract under the same or similar terms as LG, then at 57 million increased revenue, we should see a new market cap as the shareprice increases another 25 to 30 dollars. This pattern should continue with each new licensee (provided they arrive in close proximity with each other). This new format of licensing via threshhold, not only incents the licensee to do well, it also allows for an objective projection of future earnings on which to set and apply multiples for establishing our value via market cap. I think this is a brilliant play and certainly should enhance our shareholder value far quicker than the old pay a little up front and pay more later format used for 2g. The street has been reluctant to cuddle up to IDCC because of safe evaluation problems in the past. MO
Posted by: TFWG dboone, great summary, wish mine was as eloquent. Regarding the following: Yes, I believe I heard Mr. Merritt state our current 3g rates where 'plus' $1.50 for 3g. I believe it was also stated, or understood that this was a mean based on current licensees. Therefore, as we finally capture the big guys, this rate will come down.. Per another excellent summary of the ASM by KAJO the following was stated “Q. We talk about 1% for 2G. Can you give us a feel for 3G? A. UB- Right now we average just north of $1.50 with a fair participation by the market. In 2G, we were getting between 1 to 2% per phone. This is difficult to predict because our revenue is based on the percentage of the cost of the phone. In our projection, we are using an assumption of 1% on an estimated $200 per phone in 2010. For 3G, we are trying to push it a little higher then the $1.50 per phone. Best, Bob BTW, I was the guy who asked the last questions regarding the buy-back, its effect on eps, and why reporting IDCC reports so late.
Posted by: lastchoice
802.11 interoperability, 802.16/wimax, and eventually media independent/802.21 should all be opportunities to increase revenue later. and by 2010 3g will be just peaking for years to come!!! Billion--with a 'B' -end-
Also see: Archived 3G Licensing and Royalties posts for April 26th through June 3rd 2006 Archive includes first hand reports on the June 1, 2006 Annual Shareholders Meeting
|
| Important Disclaimer |
We welcome your comments! All Rights Reserved. Bill Dalglish |
Direct site comments to Music City Design, LLC |
posts and threads related to 
This 3G topic includes posts related to the important partnership between InterDigital and Infineon. InterDigital announced October 4, 2006 that it has extended its licensing arrangement with Infineon (IFX) This allows InterDigital to integrate its own 3G baseband design (WCDMA, HSDPA and HSUPA) with Infineon's 2G suite to offer a complete dual-mode 2G/3G wireless modem platform suite, including the 3G protocol stack. This extended licensing agreement is positive for InterDigital, as it will enable the company to offer a more complete product, and will improve its chances to add new 3G licensees for its technology solutions suite. 
Editor's note: The 
Good get Data_Rox - nice to see that IDCC has a potential ASIC customer at U. S. Department of Defense - DOD (see bolded below). Guess IDCC does need to tell us about it yet since this is just a DOD feasibility study - i.e., it's not "material" until they commit to buy and deploy the devices in quantity.
"InterDigital now offers an entire dual-mode 2G/3G modem suite to customers," stated Mark Lemmo, InterDigital's Senior Business Development and Product Management Officer. "By integrating this market proven, evolutionary 2G technology with our own leading-edge WCDMA technology, we have a compelling design solution for semiconductor companies seeking to enter the 3G market, as well as handset manufacturers seeking to design and produce their own 2G/3G modems."
Since March 2001, InterDigital and Infineon have been developing and commercializing 3G technologies and products in a strategic relationship. Under the expanded agreement, InterDigital and Infineon will continue to jointly develop and upgrade the 3G protocol stack incorporating UMTS Release 5 and HSDPA. InterDigital will be compensated for associated non-recurring engineering services.
How nasty? At one point in 2003 Qualcomm (nasdaq: QCOM - news - people ) was accused of stacking a standard-setting body with dozens of shills, mostly laymen who would hardly be interested in debating the best way to build an "orthogonal frequency division multiplexing network." Qualcomm, panel members said, wanted to kill the new technology to protect its cellular business. The standards group, the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, allows anyone to sign up, attend meetings and qualify to vote. Qualcomm has denied the charges; in June the IEEE froze the process to sort through the conflicting claims. Meanwhile, Mobile-Fi remains remote for consumers.
Palm (Nasdaq:PALM) today announced the Palm(R) Treo(TM) 750v smartphone, the first Treo smartphone to take advantage of Vodafone's 3G/UMTS network. The Treo 750v brings the Palm experience on Microsoft(R)'s Windows Mobile(R) 5.0 to Europe for the first time. The new Treo 750v will be available first to Vodafone customers in the following countries: Austria, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, the UK and other regions by the end of the calendar year.
Philips Semiconductors to become NXP
Bill Nasgovitz turned around the $1.78 billion Heartland Value Fund's performance this year by buying more shares in wireless and computer-software companies.
The manager has lifted returns by increasing bets on companies including InterDigital Communications Corp., a King of Prussia maker of mobile-phone software, whose shares have climbed 52 percent this year. An 8.8 percent stake in First Consulting Group Inc., an adviser to health-care and pharmaceutical clients, has also helped.
Helping catapult the LG brand into the public eye is the company's multimillion-dollar U.S. marketing campaign that plays off its initials with the tag line "Life's Good."
Panasonic, Cingular Introduce Panasonic Toughbook CF-29 Notebooks with Integrated 3G
UP-AND-DOWN UNIT. More recent inventions include the Nexperia multimedia processors, which accounted for 17% of the unit's sales last year. Nexperia chips can be programmed to play TV on mobile phones or to stream audio and video signals into cars. Philips Semi has also played a pioneering role in so-called near-field communication, or short-range wireless communication of the sort used in contactless subway passes.
First, when you read the license, the term “threshhold amount” is neither used or defined in the license. The only only wording that appears to possibly relate to a threshhold is the following clause which by its’ wording only applies only to infrastructure.
The press release said,"voice-enabled " so I would assume that it would help the computer device to act as a 3G phone if the device had that capability i.e. speaker, wireless ect.
LG Electronics on Wednesday released WCDMA HSDPA handsets for video calls through SK Telecom and KFT. The Cyon video-phones (LG-SH100 (l) and LG-KH1000) have a wide LCD screen showing both callers. Video chat is possible using side keys. LG expects that once the HSDPA service becomes widespread, video calls and chat will become a powerful trend. The phones also feature an MP3 player, wireless Internet and games. They cost not more than W800,000 (US$1=W958).
NEW DELHI (AP) -- Qualcomm Inc. says it may use some of the royalties earned from mobile phone sales in India to fund research projects here in an apparent move to counter demands for a cut in its royalty rates.
denos: As of Jan 1, 2007, Ericsson will have a paid up, perpetual infrastructure license, covering 2G standards. Here are pertinent abstracts from the PLA. In regards to 3G, Ericssson has no patent rights, and in effect has been infringing. Nobody knows why IDCC has not been acting on the infringement issue.
The Ericsson subject does not come up much because there are more immediate things to talk about. I was reviewing some old Ericsson news, and I have a question (or 2) for some of the more knowledgeable people here. If I am reading correctly, Ericsson only makes payments up to the end of 2006 - according to the settlement. If that is true (and I may be misunderstanding), does that mean that their license expires at the end of 2006? If so, does that mean that they need to be working towards a license pretty soon? When the settlement happened, most opinions were that there would be a follow up 3G license. Well, it has been a long time, and we have not heard a peep!
..."Lists of patents declared essential to WCDMA appear at the web site of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). At the beginning of 2004, we identified 6,872 patents declared essential to WCDMA and 924 patents declared essential to CDMA2000. This paper reports the results of a study of these 7,796 patents and applications and the standards to which they are declared essential."
(2) “A significant portion of our business involves the licensing of our patents on a worldwide basis. A number of our patented inventions have been included in various digital wireless communications standards. Many of these patented inventions are considered essential(i.e., required to be used) to build equipment in accordance with the standards. Those standards include, but are not limited to, TIA/EIA-54/136, narrowband CDMA (TIA/EIA-95 and similar standards), WCDMA (both FDD and TDD), cdma2000, TD-SCDMA, GSM, GPRS, EDGE, PDC, PHS, TETRA and DECT. Accordingly, we believe that companies making, using, or selling products compliant with these standards require a license under our patents.”
Actually, qualcomm patented CDMA in all aspects for terrestrial use starting in the mid 80s. It was first commercially applied to operators that had fairly limited spectrum available to them, and thus needed the technology to be applied in 1.25MHz channels....remember that this first commercial implementation was very wideband when compared with GSM or TDMA. IS-95 also had a very robust data interface at 14.4Kbps PACKET data (reference IS-707)
At the same time, IDCC used those U.S. Army foundation patents to develop and field test a commercial "broadband" CDMA fixed wireless system designed for robust transmission of packet-based data(i.e., B-CDMA).
As a result, QCOM has great IPR strength in "narrowband" CDMA2000 technology today while IDCC's IPR strength lies in "broadband" W-CDMA technology. Seems like there are two mutually exclusive CDMA patent portfolios that are to a large extent aligned with the wireless standards(there are exceptions of course, such as QCOM's "soft handover" patents which appear to be essential in all of the current CDMA standards).
Hey NET, Moto(rola) is currently raking it in hundreds of million of annual licensing revenue in CDMA + GSM, they are the proverbial king pin of the cabal, Moto is my #1 target, period. They are the ultimate bull eye, period. Judging that they acquired TPPCom, they are lacking in the TDD arena, which is IDCC ace in the hole. IMO TDD will be over 50% of all cellular operation in the future.
Chris Ambrosio, Director of the Strategy Analytics Wireless Device Strategies service, noted, "At 17 percent, Nokia's 3G market share is almost half its overall global total of 33 percent. WCDMA (3G) technology, which accounted for just 5 per cent of total handset sales during Q2 2005, remains a market in the early stages of development, but it is worrying for a cluster of aspiring Asian vendors that Nokia has already become best in class. Early market-leaders NEC and LG have been overtaken by Nokia and they have significant work to do to match up in the next battle for WCDMA phones priced below US$200 wholesale, which will present significant mass-market opportunities in 2006 to 2010."
Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. “The phones will be sold at retail shops in the U.S. from the middle of this month,” said Yuin Yang, a spokeswoman at Seoul-based Pantech.
While various recent studies have pointed to the imminent demise of 2G mobile, a new report from ABI Research takes a very different line. It says that thanks to burgeoning take-up in developing countries, 2G is very much alive and kicking.
HTC’s new, self-branding effort will be accompanied by new devices, customer support and marketing efforts, particularly in Europe. In the United States, however, HTC said it will likely continue selling devices through its handset and carrier customers.
ahhh yes....once again the 3G license rumor mill....wonder where it started this time? Sigh....too many people have been hurt by the rumors and the hype.
The GSM Association (GSMA) said in a statement that a group of its operator members would work over the next few months on establishing a core set of common features for 3G handsets to create the economies of scale for making cheaper handsets.
Back from two weeks in Scandinavia - it looks like various patent and licensing fights in the telecom sector are finally claiming the spotlight. Timing is lousy considering the market turmoil. The recent Blackberry dispute was a kind of storm warning - intellectual property right (IPR) disputes used to be marginal in the telecom world. There is no final, global agreement on W-CDMA patent structure as far as I'm aware. Companies have postponed the final fights on the issue on various fronts. Qualcomm is demanding - and getting - 4-5% fees on all W-CDMA products. But Nokia and Ericsson both have big pools of W-CDMA patents which they may be using as negotiation leverage. It's possible they both might take the stance of demanding high patent payments to offset Qualcomm licensing fees or force lower fees for themselves. Koreans may be in the process of trying to wiggle their CDMA fees lower after August 2006. Chinese seem to be still trying to use a standard called TD-SCDMA as leverage to negotiate lower licensing fees.
We have a long history of developing cellular technologies including those related to CDMA and TDMA. We led the industry in establishing TDMA-based TIA/EIA-54 as a digital wireless U.S. standard in the 1980s, and created a substantial
We also have developed and patented innovative CDMA technology solutions. Today, we hold a significant worldwide portfolio of CDMA patents and patent applications. Similar to our TDMA inventions, we believe that a number of our CDMA inventions are essential to the implementation of CDMA systems in use today. Some of our more important CDMA inventions include or relate to:
The worldwide converged mobile device or smartphone market showed no signs of slowing down during the first quarter of 2006, recording a new record in quarterly shipments. According to IDC's Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, worldwide converged mobile device shipments totaled 18.9 million units in Q1 2006, an increase of 7.5% from the fourth quarter of 2005 and 67.8% compared to the same quarter one year ago
Panasonic - Holding on to the number 2 spot was Japanese vendor Panasonic, which grew its shipments 28.3% from the previous quarter and an impressive 65.1% over the same quarter a year ago. As a result, Panasonic wrapped up 10.0% of the worldwide market share. The majority of Panasonic's devices ended up in Japan where all of the company's devices are carried by NTT DoCoMo. In addition, the company still has a presence in the Asia/Pacific market with its X700.
NEC - Following closely behind Panasonic was Japanese vendor NEC, which trailed the number two vendor by just a hundred thousand units. The company continues to see quarterly gains in Japan and posted a 32.6% sequential increase in the first quarter along with 57.0% year-over-year growth. All of NEC's converged mobile devices remained within its home region of Japan.
Sharp - A relative newcomer to the market, Sharp first joined the converged mobile device market in late 2005. The company followed up its debut by shipping over a million units in 1Q06 and posted a 174.4% sequential increase in the process. As a result, Sharp collected 5.7% worldwide market share. Like NEC, all of its devices were shipped into Japan.
Some 70 million subscribers have signed up for WCDMA technologies, while about 30 million are using CDMA2000 EV-DO solutions. Other market researchers have noted that EV-DO started its marketing push later than the WCDMA service providers.
Chinese market with plans to open a large-scale headquarters here late this year.
The 141-meter-high office and commercial complex, with 30 floors above ground and four below, was completed late last year and it is now under partial operation. The high-rise edifice which will accommodate all eight LG units in China and others, cost roughly $400 million over the past three years.
spencer,
Thanks for the correction..I did actually mean 2/3 "Revenue" from Chips and other sources and 1/3 "Revenue" from QTL..Qualcomm employs 9,300..IMO:10% are actually required to support it's QTL Division...That is why I like IDCC's Business Plan better..The real money is made in selling $5 bags of popcorn, rather than operating a Chain of Movie Theatres.It will take some time before Wall St. gets that message..
Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. June 2, 2006 - High Tech Computer Corp. (HTC; TAIEX: 2498) today announced that the company has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Dopod (Cayman) Holding Corporation ("Dopod"). HTC will acquire over 50% of Dopod shares as Dopod becomes HTC's subsidiary. The transaction value will not surpass US$150 million. The alliance between Dopod and HTC will make the synergy to provide the best service to operators and end users.
Dopod was founded in 2002 and has quickly established a premier position within Asia's mobile phone industry. The company's astounding success is due not to coincidence, but because of its superior expertise and service. By utilizing the innovation of HTC product portfolio, Dopod handsets deliver maximum value to consumers and enable users to "Enjoy Mobility" anywhere and everywhere. By integrating top-notch mobile communication and information system technologies, Dopod devices cater to modern lifestyles by providing customers with convenient and instant access to their stored information.
The LG format is very safe for the recurring royalty projections and the only error can be undervalue if our licensees blow through their respective threshholds. I really like this licensing format.
worth noting it doesn't include 802 standards. i believe it would include hsxpa patents as they are part of 3GPP release.6.