Nokia comments

"We are pleased with the Court's decision that the patent claims are invalid and believe it is consistent with and supported by the facts. This is the second court to conclude that Qualcomm does not have relevant and valid GSM patents. The UK High Court and US ITC findings are further evidence of Qualcomm overstating its position as an industry innovator and demanding compensation for patents that are not relevant or valid."

Rick Simonson, chief financial officer, Nokia, March 3, 2008

"We are pleased with Judge Luckern's decision and believe it is consistent with and supported by the facts. This decision confirms our belief that Qualcomm does not have relevant GSM patents. This is another failed attempt by Qualcomm to mislead both Nokia and the telecommunications industry."

Rick Simonson, chief financial officer, Nokia, December 12, 2007


"The proper functioning of standardization requires that companies whose patented technology is adopted into a standard commit to licence these patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. Breaking these commitments compromises the whole standardization process, stifles innovation and harms consumers. We welcome the European Commission's continuation of the investigation into Qualcomm's business conduct."

Tero Ojanperä, Chief Technology Officer, Nokia, October 1, 2007


"There is significant evidence to warrant an ITC investigation into Qualcomm's business conduct. We are taking this action to stop Qualcomm's practice of copying Nokia's patented technology, without permission, and making these innovations available to its chipset customers. We are seeking the same remedies Qualcomm has sought against Nokia in multiple venues around the world. Nokia will continue to ensure its rights and competitive advantage is protected."

Rick Simonson, chief financial officer, Nokia, August 17, 2007


"Nokia has a strong history of innovation in IP broadcast television and mobile download environments predating Qualcomm's activities. This is another example where Qualcomm has effectively copied Nokia's innovations. We believe that, for MediaFLO to evolve and for BREW to remain viable, Qualcomm needs access to these and many other patented Nokia inventions."

Tero Ojanperä, chief technology officer, Nokia, June 11, 2007


"Over the past 19 months Qualcomm has filed 11 patent litigation cases against Nokia seeking damages and injunctions. Nokia has now filed its first counter action to address Qualcomm's unauthorized use of Nokia technology. We will continue to defend ourselves and exercise all rights according to our extensive IPR portfolio."

Rick Simonson, chief financial officer, Nokia, May 24, 2007


Rick Simonson, Chief Financial Officer, Nokia
Nokia Q1 Earnings Conference Call 19 April, 2007

First I want to cover a few key points around the recent IPR activity, try and cut through what may seem like noise, and discuss what’s relevant and important for Nokia:

As you know, April 9 passed without a new agreement between Nokia and Qualcomm. However we continue to be in cross-license negotiations and are working to reach a mutually acceptable agreement as soon as possible. After April 9th, Qualcomm's early patents are now fully paid-up and royalty-free to Nokia. Any future royalty arrangement with Qualcomm needs to address Qualcomm’s later patents only. This agreement should reflect that we believe that Qualcomm’s relative contribution to the development of technology used in mobile devices, especially WCDMA, is significantly lower than in 1992.

Reflecting these changes that have occurred after the partial expiration of the old agreement and other compelling reasons, we made a 20 million dollar payment to Qualcomm – which we believe is fair and reasonable compensation for the use of Qualcomm's patents in UMTS handsets during this quarter. We intend to make similar payments in the future and will announce these payments when they are made. Since Qualcomm has indicated that they will not accept our payments, we will deposit them into an escrow account for Qualcomm’s benefit. We also said that Nokia has paid less than 3% cumulative license fee for all patents in UMTS handsets, under all its patent license agreements. This number is a gross number and excludes infrastructure royalties and all royalty income collected by Nokia. The point of this disclosure is that we want to highlight that there is no such thing as a Qualcomm “standard agreement” or a so called “standard rate”. The actual payment, what you pay, is subject to a lot of different commercial terms and conditions from Qualcomm.

We then later stated that we believe Qualcomm is currently using over one hundred of Nokia’s GSM/WCDMA and CDMA2000 essential patents in its chipsets. We have yet to agree with Qualcomm on the compensation due to us for these patents, but this a very important and critical component to the on-going negotiations.

So what’s our end game with all this? Nokia has built its IPR portfolio over the last 15 years - investing close to 30 billion euro in R&D and we now own over 11,000 patent families. We want to be fairly compensated for our leading R&D investment and IPR portfolio – both by paying what is fair and reasonable and nothing more, and also by ensuring that we are properly compensated by those who are using our technology.

Bottom line, Nokia will do what it takes to ensure the long term viability of our business and we will work to retain the value our innovation has created over the years, for the benefit of Nokia, its shareholders, our customers, the end users and for the overall well being of the industry.