Question-and-Answer Session
Operator
Thank you. (Operator Instructions). We’ll take our first question from Tom Carpenter with Hilliard Lyons.
Tom Carpenter - Hilliard Lyons
Good morning, Bill, Janet, Scott.
Bill Merritt
Good morning.
Scott McQuilkin
Good morning.
Janet Point
Hi.
Tom Carpenter - Hilliard Lyons
Bill, thank you for the additional drill down on the plan beyond Nokia. Before you’ve talked about ITC and other legal matters, you mentioned that why these could come to ruling, generally these things settle, because there is too much to loose, the party is such a disparity in the outcome. And this time, as you ran the gamete, it almost seem like you were [leaning] for that you’d like a legal ruling, that validates the patents because that helps you more in licensing efforts going forward.
Bill Merritt
Yes. Well, I would say that my preference remains the settlement on the right terms. I think, that’s always been our approach and I think that the parties are trying to see if they can do that, and if we can do that, that is the best result. And I think that largely gives you the same benefit as a win, because now again, as I said you would have been through a litigation with two very capable parties and both of them choosing to take a license I think it does result in the same thing as a win.
My point on a judicial decision is that they are very valuable almost either way they go. On a win, it's certainly very valuable because it validates your position, and even in an adverse decision, it’s valuable because to some extent it becomes a roadmap for going back at patent office and working within the patent office's rule, securing new patents that overcome whatever issues may have caused difficulty in initial case.
In my career, I have done that on a number of occasions and what you come out with at the end of that process a very, very strong patent, because on the face of the patents is all the prior work that the other side has sighted in the claim construction -- in the claims and the patent you have been got rid of [any patents] that were ambiguous or perceived to be ambiguous. You will put ambiguous terms and to begin with [people] on purpose, but sometimes in hindsight you get the benefit of that. So, judicial opinions either way I see as very valuable.
- To read the full transcript on Seeking Alpha, click here »
