Probably about as good as the people at HTC who picked the component out of the catalogue and integrated it into the phone.
OK, I can see how a whole legalistic mess can start from that seed.Firstly, the patent is about a method. That is, it is NOT about the use, or otherwise, of a single component, but a way of processing signals.
Thanks for your explanation, though as an engineer I find myself still thinking that there must be a better way.
When I were a nipper (yes that was a while ago now) people designed their own modulators using discrete components. But these days? If I want a transceiver, I go to Cambridge Silicon Radio or Qualcomm etc and ask for one. Is that because I can't engineer my way out of a paper radio-anechoic chamber? No, it is because if I don't buy the whole damned stack on a pre-designed lump of silicon then my design will drown in approvals paperwork and costs and the project will fail.
So I guess that is my beef here, the method of modulation is built in to the radio modem IC, the only way that HTC can do something about that is to re-design the phone using a compliant part like they did with the microphone, or if no such component exists then wait for Qualcomm to make one.
Motives in this case seem fairly clear. Nokia want to cash in on their IP portfolio, which is only right that they are allowed to do so. HTC want to stop losing money, and the only way they can do that is by selling phones. There would seem to be a simple way forward there given that Nokia are not an HTC competitor, but lawyers and accountants are hell bent on destroying the FRAND licensing and consumers are suffering. Lawyers seem to be doing very nicely out of it though.