Re: PACER - e.Digital Corporation v. Apple Inc. ( new filed January 6 )
in response to
by
posted on
Jan 08, 2014 12:17PM
If you read the PR of the Samsung settlement, you can see that not all issues where included in the FlashR settlement
e.DIGITAL ANNOUNCES CROSS LICENSING AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH SAMSUNG
(SAN DIEGO, CA, – October 22, 2009) – e.Digital Corporation (OTC: EDIG), a leading innovator of dedicated portable entertainment systems and patented flash memory-related technology, announced today that it has entered into a cross licensing and settlement agreement with Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung). Under the terms of the confidential agreement, Samsung obtained a license and release on e.Digital’s foreign and domestic patent rights, including the Company’s Flash-R™ patent portfolio, and e.Digital obtained a license and release on certain Samsung patents. e.Digital also received a one-time licensing fee.
Above is the meaningful portion of the PR. Point to why 108 & 445 are still in play with Samsung.
From the 10Q we determined that Samsung paid us 1.2M (just going from memory). That was over 4 years ago. There was something else that was 'special' about the Samsung agreement but we never found out what that was. I think by now we know that it wasn't anything as important as was speculated at the time.
- Sinkman