Tyler Burns - Director, Investor Relations Jim Skippen - President and Chief Executive Officer Shaun McEwan - Chief Financial Officer Michael Vladescu - Chief Operating Officer

Justin Kew - Cantor Fitzgerald Tim Long - Bank of Montreal Daniel Kim - Paradigm Capital Robert Young - Canaccord Genuity Blair Abernethy - Stifel Eyal Ofir - Clarus Robin Manson-Hing - CIBC Ralph Garcea - Global Maxfin

Thank you, operator, and good morning everyone. Earlier this morning, WiLAN issued a news release announcing its financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2013.

This news release is available on WiLAN’s website and will be filed on SEDAR and EDGAR. On this morning’s call, we have Jim Skippen, WiLAN’s President and Chief Executive Officer, Shaun McEwan, WiLAN’s Chief Financial Officer, and Michael Vladescu, WiLAN’s Chief Operating Officer.

Following remarks prepared by Mr. Skippen and Mr.

McEwan, analysts will have the opportunity to ask questions. Certain matters discussed in today’s conference call or answers that maybe given to questions could constitute forward-looking statements.

Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated. Risk factors that could affect our results are detailed in the company’s annual information form and other public filings that are made available on SEDAR and EDGAR.

During this conference call, we will refer to adjusted earnings, adjusted earnings does not have a standardized meaning prescribed by U.S. GAAP.

Adjusted earnings are defined in our quarterly and annual filings that are made available on SEDAR and EDGAR. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Jim Skippen.

Jim, please go ahead.

Thanks, Tyler and good morning to everyone. I first want to touch on a number of second quarter highlights.

During the quarter, WiLAN generated revenues of $19.9 million, exceeding our guidance of $17.5 million for the quarter. We signed license agreements with five companies, including an early license renewal with Samsung bringing our total number of companies licensed to 270.

We returned over $7 million to shareholders in share buyback and dividend payments. In addition, I am pleased to advise that the Board of Directors just declared a quarterly dividend of CAD0.04 per share for the second quarter of 2013.

This dividend will be paid on October 4, 2013 to shareholders of record on September 13, 2013. Next, I would like to take a few moments to reiterate our business strategy.

One of the key strategies we employ is to have multiple licensing programs in different technology segments. Each core portfolio would be expected to include many and sometimes hundreds or even thousands of valuable patents.

We intend to keep adding to each core portfolio so that the value of the licensees is always increasing. We have been building a large wireless portfolio since 2006, and today, our wireless portfolio contains over 1,200 patents and applications.

Since 2007, we have been building a more valuable digital TV and display portfolio, which today includes over 1400 patents and applications. We were committed to and are active pursuing additional core programs with a particular focus on the semiconductor medical devices and data management markets.

We are forging partnerships with other owners of patent portfolios across various markets and industries. These partnerships increased the number of portfolios that we can effectively license.

To-date, we have signed 13 partnerships. As I indicated, we have signed licenses with over 270 companies and what is notable is that the vast majority of these agreements were achieved without litigation.

While we are prepared to be fair always, we always reiterate the point that signing agreements with poor terms might help our short-term results, but it would hurt our long-term success since we could be put in a position that we would need to offer similar inferior terms to future licensees. This is not in the best interest of WiLAN in our view or our long-term shareholders.

We attempt to conclude license agreements through negotiation, but we must be prepared to use litigation if negotiations do not progress adequately even though we know litigation can be unpredictable. Our business strategy favors reaching settlements to avoid court.

However, as I have just highlighted the settlements must be fair. We also have to be very careful what we say in public forums or conference calls for that matter regarding our licensing and litigation, because infringers can take our statements and partial statements out of context in court proceedings.

Our goal is to be as transparent as possible, but again we have to do what is in the best interest of our business and long-term shareholders. Turning now to our litigations, we currently are involved in 15 patent litigations against 13 defendants.

Recently, we had one of those cases go to trial and verdict, and unfortunately, the Jury verdict for the defendants. I can make the following comments and observations about this problem.

We strongly disagree with this product and believe that jury reached the wrong conclusion and we are continuing to evaluate whether an appeal is appropriate. This case in Texas involved four U.S.

patents from one patent family we acquired from Airspan as part of a larger portfolio acquisition. So, it represents a tiny fraction of our overall portfolio.

When investors evaluate this decision it is important to keep in mind the litigation including judges and juries are somewhat unpredictable. And from time to time we do expect court rooms will go against us.

Sometimes the decision may go against us even when we should win. This is just part of the trial process particularly as lay process in the jury can struggle when dealing with the highly technical nature of some patents.

Even if loose a patent or a case this story is almost never over with the infringer. Since we will usually have other patents that apply to the infringers’ products, we certainly believe that we have other patents that apply to the four defendants’ products in the recent Texas 3GPP trail.

In fact, three of the four defendants from the recent trial are already defendants in other WiLAN patent cases. Nevertheless, after this setback, we are reviewing some of our strategies and approaches to litigation with the focus on the following two things.

Ensuring that we do the very best we can when we are presenting in court, and attempting to reduce litigation fees overall. Turning to other litigations, litigation involving Apple, Alcatel-Lucent, ACC, HP, Novatel and Sierra Wireless relating to Wi-Fi and CDMA technologies in handsets, base stations and modules is scheduled to go to trial on October 2013.

Recall that Dell was dismissed from this litigation earlier this year after they took a license. Litigations involving RIM and Bluetooth technology are now scheduled to go to trial on March 2014.

The trial and litigation involving Toshiba related to multiple digital TV and display related patents is now scheduled for January 2014. Litigation involving Alcatel-Lucent and LTE technology is scheduled to go to trial in April 2014.

Next, I would like to discuss our core licensing programs and recent license signings. In the second quarter, we signed license agreements with five companies.

Telrad Networks and Doro AB licensed wireless technologies in our portfolio. As I highlighted at the beginning of the call, we signed an early license renewal with Samsung.

The license covers Samsung’s mobile products and networking infrastructure equipment. Dell signed a license to certain patents in our portfolio to resolve litigation.

I mentioned on our last conference call that Panasonic signed a license early in the second quarter to our broad digital TV and display portfolio. Panasonic is the first major television manufacturer to license our broad digital TV and display portfolio.

Subsequent to the end of the second quarter, Unnecto licensed wireless technologies in our portfolio. To conclude, our successes in recent months have advanced the key growth strategies.

The license agreement signed with Panasonic, Samsung and others are important milestones of furthering our licensing program. We continue to have a significant level of business activity that we believe will drive performance that will benefit WiLAN and our long-term shareholders.

With this, I will now turn things over to Shaun to discuss our financial results in more detail. Shaun?

Thank you, Jim and good morning. Revenues for the second quarter of 2013 exceeded our guidance by approximately $2.4 million or 13.7% and came in at $19.9 million.

As Jim commented earlier, we signed an agreement with Samsung during the quarter which contributed in part to the higher revenues in the quarter. As the renewal license replaced the previous license, any revenues that would have been booked under the old license were replaced with revenues under the new license.

For the quarter, four licensees each accounted for more than 10% of revenues as compared to two in the same period last year. In the second quarter of 2013, the top 10 licensees accounted for 85% of revenues as compared to 86% in the prior year period.

Now, I would like to cover our operating expenses briefly. The cost of revenue expenses for the second quarter of fiscal 2013 totaled $22.5 million.

Patent licensing and litigation expenses, cash costs in this category were $1.3 million and $14.6 million respectively. Cost of revenue expenses in the quarter also included $6.3 million in patent amortization and $263,000 in stock-based compensation, both non-cash expenses.

Comparatively in the second quarter of fiscal 2012, the cost of revenue expenses totaled $12.9 million and included licensing expenses of $864,000, litigation expenses of $5.8 million and other non-cash charges totaling $6.2 million. In the three months period ended June 30, 2012, litigation expenses, at $14.6 million exceeded our guidance for the quarter of between $10 million and $12 million and accounted for virtually all of the increase in cost of revenue expenses year-over-year.

The increase in litigation expense over the guidance provided was primarily due to significantly more effort necessary in particular preparations for the 3GPP trial that Jim spoke of, as well as the handset case that is set to go into trial in early October of this year. As we have stated before, litigation activities can be difficult to predict.

R&D expenses in our second quarter were $2.1 million or approximately 11% of revenue and were consistent with the prior year period. Our research expense consisting principally of staff cost was $443,000.

We also spent approximately $1.4 million on the management of our patent portfolio, expenses relating to the prosecution and maintenance of our patents that we consider as development expenses. Patent management expenses increased over the comparative period from last year by slightly more than $570,000.

The increase is due in part to higher maintenance and prosecution fees resulting from the acquisition of the large digital TV and display portfolio WiLAN acquired in late 2011. WiLAN’s response to post grant reviews by the USPTO, which began after the second quarter of 2012 also contributed to the increase.

Our marketing, general and administration expenses in the second quarter of 2013 totaled $3.9 million and included $3 million in overhead expenses, which are cash-oriented and $850,000 in non-cash charges for depreciation and stock-based compensation. Comparatively, in the second quarter of 2012, MG&A expense totaled $3.3 million, which was comprised of $2.4 million in overhead expenses and non-cash charges of $780,000.

The increase in year-over-year is predominantly related to increased staff costs. For the three months ended June 30, 2013, WiLAN recorded a net income tax recovery of $2 million as compared to an income tax expense of $1.4 million in previous year.

The current income tax expense of $1.3 million booked in this quarter relates to taxes withheld on royalties received from foreign jurisdictions for which there is no treaty relief. As a result of all of the above, WiLAN’s GAAP earnings amounted to a loss of $7.6 million or $0.06 per share in the three months period ended June 30, 2013, as compared to a GAAP loss of $0.1 million or nil per share for the same period last year.

Adjusted earnings, a non-GAAP measure that assists in evaluating the performance of the business by eliminating certain non-cash and nonrecurring charges for the second quarter amounted to a loss of $762,000 or $0.01 per share, which was within our guidance range of between a loss of $1 million and an earnings of $1 million. Now quickly turning our attention to the balance sheet for a moment, we completed the quarter with $159.3 million in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments.

This represents a decrease of $7.9 million from the first quarter. Turning to second quarter of 2013, business operations generated $2 million of cash and the company paid dividends totaling $4.9 million, repurchased shares totaling $2.3 million and invested $2.3 million in the purchase of patents.

These items account for the change in cash position in the second quarter of 2013. Through the third quarter of 2013, looking ahead to our guidance, we expect revenue to be at least $20.7 million.

This revenue guidance does not include the potential impact of any additional royalty reports to be received between now and the end of the quarter or any new agreements that may be signed during the remainder of this quarter. Operating expenses for the third quarter are expected to be in the range of $20.5 million to $21.6 million, of which $13.5 million to $14.5 million is expected to be litigation expense.

For the third quarter of 2013, and assuming no additional agreements were signed, adjusted earnings are now expected to be in the range of a loss of $650,000 and earnings of $500,000. As we are executing against a significant number of litigations concurrently, our operating expenses are to remain relatively high in the third quarter.

Obviously, we expect to realize a meaningful long-term revenue benefit from these initiatives and would expect our legal expense to reduce as a result of reaching license agreements with various defendants. As we have discussed in the past and our performance has proven, our business model has a high degree of operating leverage.

This concludes my review of the financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2013. And then we will now turn the call over to Tyler.

Thank you very much, Shaun. We will now move to the Q&A portion of the conference call.

As we want to get to questions from as many analysts as possible, we ask that you limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. We also ask that analysts avoid long or multi-part questions.

Should analysts have additional questions and time permit, analysts are invited to rejoin the queue. Operator, may we have the first question?

Thank you very much. Good morning everyone.

So, the first question just on the increased, well not the guidance, but the amount of revenue you expect in Q3, is there a big proportion of the variable revenue in that, in other words, is the seasonality from the reach upside high in Q3, so, is there seasonality built into that?

Justin, the revenues, we don’t usually break it down, but I can tell you it’s relatively flat. So, it’s not seasonality from that, that’s built in.

Okay, good. Thank you.

It soon takes place.

Yes, thanks. And then just, yes so just as we understand, to have a good clear understanding of upcoming litigation activity, then so really the only trial scheduled for H2 like before the end of the year would be the Wi-Fi, is that correct, I mean, there is the Hon Hai as well?

Well, the way you describe that the Wi-Fi, it’s really probably the more critical technology in that trial, which is an October trial in Marshall, Texas is the CDMA and HSPA technology, related to handsets, although Wi-Fi does form a part of it. And that’s the only trial we now have scheduled in 2013.

All the rest are moved to 2014.

Okay. And that includes the Hon Hai, the contract dispute for Florida that was scheduled November, is that still – will that one still go ahead?

No, I don’t believe so.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Again, I am not sure if it was ever actually scheduled for trial.

Okay.

2013, I don’t recall that, but I do know that we don’t have a trial in November 2013 with Hon Hai.

Okay, thank you. I will pass the line.

Thank you.

Thank you. First, just the clarification on Samsung, I think you mentioned that it was responsible for part of the upside compared to your guidance, could you just give us a sense, is that something related to the fact that it was signed in that quarter?

In other words, is it a one-time benefit as the deal was signed, or is that something that we should expect going forward to also result in a higher stream for you? That’s number one.

And then number two, maybe just on a higher level, Jim, if you could just talk about given the outcome in the HSPA trial, when planning your business over the next year or two, are you now expecting that you will now more often be going to trial given the outcome and the model needs to be adjusted accordingly, or do you think that’s just a one-off and has really no impact on these other OEMs decisions to either make their settle or go to court decision? Thank you.

Okay. So, the first question I think what I heard you ask is whether our guidance of $17.5 million, if you recall that would have been included part of the former Samsung agreement stream of payments.

That agreement went away as replaced by a new agreement. And in part, as a result of that, our revenues were $19.9 million.

So, it increased. And I think you are saying is that’s sort of a one-time phenomena or is that something that we would typically expect to continue.

I think the way I will answer that is I am not supposed to get into the exact financial terms of the Samsung agreement, based on our agreement with Samsung. But I will say this our typical model is that we would be looking for payments during the lifetime of the agreement of basically an equal level.

So, that would be very typical and it would be quite unusual if they would – the payments were not relatively equal throughout the entire agreement, so.

Okay, that’s helpful.

Thank you, Tim. You can sort of read between the lines there.

But you can see what our guidance is next quarter and…

Okay, great. And then…

On the second question really every case is a case-by-case situation. We prefer not to go to trial and really we evaluate whether we can sign licenses at rates we think are fair and if we can and we don’t go to trial and if we can’t we do.

Do I think will be more likely it’s hard to say, I mean we are we think it makes more sense to settle and so we were trying to settle things and we think most of the time it will settle. But it is possible we can go to trial and I can’t really predict easily whether its more likely or less likely to go to trial in the future, it’s just hard to know we have to see.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks Tim.

Good morning. Thank you.

Just, I wonder if you can go back to the quarterly revenue run rate here. Nice to see that the revenues have bumped up from the $18 million a quarter range for the last couple of quarters, but if we look at the forward numbers and with the five new licensees, perhaps you can help me with the math here in terms of, Jim you kind of alluded to the flat payments.

So, for the third quarter, just to be clear, will you be getting a full contribution now from Samsung, Panasonic, and the others? Is that built into the guidance or is there some type was there a different term in terms of when it started, when the payments actually started to come through?

I guess my question is the delta that we see between say Q1 and Q2 revenues to now Q3 guidance, say $3 million to $4 million, would that be the rough delta that we can assume as the right amount from these new five new licensees?

Well, so I would say firstly remember though that we lost some because the Samsung payments from the old licenses were taken out replaced with new payments. But, maybe it amounts the same thing.

But there is obviously a delta between $17.5 million and $20.7 million and it would be reasonable to assume that delta is a result of new licenses we’ve signed. But I can’t – I don’t want to categorically confirm or deny that but the numbers kind of speak for themselves.

Okay.

The typical model is to increase rather to have equal payments during the term of the agreement, so that would be the model we would attempt to achieve with most licensees.

Okay, thank you for that. And on the litigation expense front, the expense is now in the $14 million range per quarter.

Understandably it is difficult to forecast, obviously, with all the litigations currently ongoing. In terms of looking forward with the trial scheduled, I presume that rate would continue well into Q4 and possibly into Q1, would that be a reasonable assumption?

Well, there is a lot of work underway at WiLAN right now, I think, to look at alternatives that will reduce that litigation level of litigation expense. So, I’m very hopeful that that is the worst cast and that we can do better than that.

But we have to see where these things go. I think in our current forecast, we do think that litigation fees will drop somewhat, even if we don’t change anything.

So, right now, at least I think we think that this quarter would be a high watermark. But again we are quite keen that we see litigation expenses go down and we are working on it we might have had something to announce or some new news at this conference call happens three weeks now, but we’re working on that.

So, I think it’s a high watermark. And it should go down from there is the bottom-line.

Perfect, thank you very much.

Hi, good morning. If I can continue on the litigation expense line there, can you talk about how confident you are on the guidance for Q3, I understand that there is variability.

I’m just trying to compare the previous quarter. The range you gave was $10 million to $12 million, which is a $2 million range and this quarter you are giving a $1 million range, which suggests that you have greater visibility or greater confidence.

Would that be the case or am I reading into that too much?

Well, I don’t know, I mean we try to get it – do it exactly as we can every quarter. We try to be correct and I think this quarter we were little bit under what it turned out to be that was largely driven by something completely unexpected to us, which was that we got attacked on our privilege lock and had to go through literally, I think millions of documents are 100s in any of them fighting over whether they should be privileged or not and that ended up adding $2 million to the expense.

The other thing is some of the court cases were advanced with the earlier trial dates and that sort of spread up the level of spend. Having said that, I think we feel that is the number we given is a conservative number and we don’t expect litigation to be worse than that, we hope that some of the things we’re working on work out we can do a bit better.

But assuming that nothing changes, that’s the number we think it’s realistic.

Okay. And then my second question would just be if I could ask you about your philosophy on the dividend going forward.

In the past you’ve broken out some targets as a percentage of cash flow, I think 40% you said was allocated to dividends. And mindful that you have plenty of cash balance to sustain a dividend for quite a while, now that you’ve seen a couple of quarters with cash balance declined.

Can you talk about the philosophy of how consistent that dividend might be in the near-term?

Sure. Well, our philosophy is that we want to continue to allocate 40% of free cash flow.

We think that the level of litigation spend is almost like a capital investment. In that it is expensive but it’s temporary and it’s going to drive revenues down the road and we think – we don’t, we think it’s not a normalized activity so, we feel very comfortable that our dividend is at the right level and we will be continuing it.

In fact, it’s our philosophy that we would like to be a company that’s periodically increasing its dividend and subject to our financial performance on what the board sites to do. I would be happy personally to see that.

So, I don’t think there is any conflation at all this time that we would be cutting the dividend or reducing the dividend and you see the high level of spend as a temporary phenomenon.

Okay great, if I have more questions, I will hop back in the queue.

Okay.

Thanks very much. Jim, I just wondered if maybe you can give us an update on how you are thinking of capital allocation on the acquisition of patent pools right now versus buying back your own stock, given what has happened in the last few weeks and maybe gives us a sense of what capacity you have on your issuer bid right now.

Well, Shaun may have some comments on that too that might be as…

Yes, I can tell you quickly, I’m still very much in favor of the capital allocation model we have which is basically 40 on dividends, 40 on patents acquisitions and 20 on buyback. We have been continuing to buyback our stock and at this point at least we usually discuss it right after we do the conference call because we usually want to implement process when we are at a black out.

So, I assume that we will be meeting and talking about it if we want anything to change. But what I expect at this time is that we will likely continue to allocate our capital and roughly those proportions.

In terms of the acquisition pipeline, I wonder if you can give us a little color on what the funnel is looking like right now and I know you had one smaller portfolio in the quarter. What is your thinking in the back half of the year here?

Yeah, there were actually two acquisitions that were agreed upon, I think one is confidential and is part of a local license, so I can’t really – I can’t elaborate further but I’ll tell you there were actually two acquisitions that were agreed to this quarter. The pipeline is robust, I mean we see an enormous number of opportunities, I think right now usually in the quarter will evaluate about 50 opportunities and probably 20 then are – 20 to 30 will say we’re in a closer look and they continue to go through the final and sort it goes to different levels of due diligence and before they get to the point where we’re making offers on it and sometimes we can get it at a price that we think makes sense and sometimes we can’t, but there is lots of patents available.

The tricky part is finding valuable ones.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Okay.

Thanks for taking my question. So, just touching on the patent acquisition, if you look at the balance sheet you guys have added about incrementally $25 million bucks worth of patent finance obligations.

I imagine that has to do with the Cypress acquisition because of some deal you struck with Samsung. Could you just talk a little bit more in terms of how we should expect this $30 million to get paid?

Also on the cash flow similarly, I noticed it wasn’t part of the patent acquisition so, I wasn’t sure if this is an obligation going forward to be acquiring patents over the long haul or it was a one-time thing, just to get some clarification there if you will and then Jim could you also talk about just the addition of the new executive from Acacia and obviously it looks like you are building out your semiconductor licensing. So maybe give some comments on that.

Yeah, okay, well, the – that’s I think it’s $26 million, maybe it’s $25 million….

$26.4 million.

$26.4 million, that relates to an obligation with one of our licensees that over time we will be acquiring a number of patents, and we don’t know exactly based on the terms that there is some variability on when those payments will be made. And so that’s the way that the accounting treatment, I don’t know Shaun if you want to...

Yes, it’s related to the acquisition of certain licensing rates and generally we think that roughly half of that will be paid in the next 12 months, the other half will be paid in the 12 months after that.

Okay. Is there a number of patents that you guys could talk to and are acquiring and the different types of technologies you are acquiring as well?

At this time, no.

Okay. And then, Jim could you just talk about kind of the semiconductor licensing.

Yeah, so, Marc was a Senior Vice President at Acacia, he was there for a lot of time, did a lot of semiconductor licensing there. We think he is a great acquisition, and he comes along.

There is another fellow that joined us (indiscernible) who was a Senior Vice President recently at IPNav and was before that a Vice President at Acacia, and he is a semiconductor technologist and he joined us as a Director in that group, and they are tasked with building a semiconductor licensing program. We do have, I think we have approximately a 100 patents in the semiconductor space already and they are going to build on that and we’re excited they have them on board and a couple of the people that we already had working for us have joined up with them and so it’s a team of about 4, 5 guys right now and we hope that within a year or two they will have a growing semiconductor licensing business.

Okay. And I will pass the line, but one last question for you.

Could you just talk about the pipeline in terms of some additional Gladios partnerships that you might be speaking to and how does that look and has anything changed since the trial outcome and I will pass the line after that? Thanks.

Yes, there is coming along, that’s for business developing, I do know several negotiations that are going on right now with licensees and offers that have been made and I do know that there are several portfolios that have come on board that law firms have looked at it and agreed with us that the portfolios look valuable and they are willing to take the portfolios on at full contingency if we want to proceed. So, I think things are moving forward.

I actually think they may file one or more losses in the next couple of weeks. So, stay tuned, but it’s fully virtually growing and we are – we gets relatively modest effort right now but there are really only two full time employees led by Paul Lerner, right now we are focusing on that and I’m optimistic that over-time it’s going to be a good part of our business.

Okay, great, thanks, I will pass the line.

Alright.

Hi, good morning. For 2014 a number of defendants, what do you see is the next major, post the Apple trial is the next major contributor I guess to revenue growth, if you were just to sign some guys.

And then moving past 2014, it seems to be a little bit of a low, I guess if you look at litigation. So what is kind of the next, I know you talked about semiconductor portfolio and medical, but is there anything that – are we going to see I guess litigation at the start being a two year plus process and what are your plans before the next one-and-a-half, two years.

You should recall that the two most significant licenses we signed in the last at least, maybe last year sort of came out of the blue for people, Panasonic TV license and a significant Samsung license and so you can always say what these are the current guys in litigation so that’s where the license is going to be sometimes there is lot of other activity that’s going on. Just in terms of what’s coming up, yes, we have this trial with a number of defendants coming up in October, a number of them or other litigations with us like for instance Apple and HTC are in other litigations with us.

But, coming down the pipe then, we have Toshiba and a trial it’s coming up on TV patents and that’s scheduled for January of 2014 so it follows fairly quickly after the October 2013 trial, then we have a number of things coming up with companies like RIM, Alcatel, LG, HTC, Apple on LT patents and the LT is on TV patents and all the rest are in LT patent. So, there is – when we look at it, there is quite a bit of activity going on until 2015, a very significant amount of activity particularly if nothing settles, although I would expect that there will be settlements.

And then we’ll have to see what we will, I mean, I don’t know if you’re trying to pick what’s going to happen in 2015, 2016, but there is an awful lot of activity in settlements over the next year and a half.

Okay, great. And I guess is just in terms of things like Nokia and other renewals like, it is just a wait and see discussion.

Discussions are continuing with Nokia and I can’t really say more than that at this time.

Great, thanks a lot.

Alright.

Good morning, good morning gentlemen.

Good morning, Ralph.

I guess just following up on the Galdios question, what was the partner contribution in the quarter, roughly or can you give any color on that?

Yeah, it was relatively low would be – it would be less than 100s of 1000 so, not that significant at this point.

Okay. And then just on building out this new team under Mark on the semi side is that sort of a prelude to further strengthen the partnership with Samsung and then some other multinationals that you may be talking to on the semi side.

That’s definitely something we are interested in and are pursuant. So, that we will – we are growing internally and making acquisitions internally, but we are looking at possible partners, strategic partners that would help us enable us with the large semiconductor portfolio.

Okay, thank you.

Alright, thanks, Ralph.

Hi, I wanted to ask a little about the Samsung renewal. In the press release you talked about patent assignments and then there was a further I guess a hint at potential to collaborate on patent developments, which I haven’t seen before.

I was wondering if you’d elaborate as much as you can and what that might mean.

Yeah. So, an element of the agreement is the contemplation that there will be a deeper relationship and deeper cooperation and I think at this point it would be premature for me to say a whole lot more than what we’ve just eluded to which is in the press release except to say that the license does contemplate a deeper level of collaboration with Samsung and we are working towards that.

Okay, okay. And then another quick one, just a broader question, I think Tim earlier tried to go down this line.

I was just wondering if you could talk about broader licensing environments. Would you say that companies are becoming more willing to litigate, irrespective of the quality of the patents, in general and is the potential to move to trial a higher likelihood now?

Is there anything that has changed in the environment around the business?

I think you almost have to have your head stuck in the sand a bit if you didn’t realize if there has been a very conservative effort by large technology companies particularly the bit infringers of patents and technology try to basically paint companies like ours at patent trolls and really to cast negative light, and quite an unfair light I think. And they are well capitalized and they have a lot of money to lobby with and the rumors are they are spending more than a $1 million a month trying to lobby congress and create noise about companies like ours in our business model.

So, I think it would be – I think we think it’s probably having some impact – I don’t think it’s probably that significant, but President Obama has now come out with some statements that I take as somewhat anti-patent. So, it is a little bit tougher environment.

I don’t think we over reacted. I don’t think we see dramatic difference in our business but it is a little bit tougher environment, I think we are recognizing that and we have to understand that and everything that we are doing.

One thing that we’re working on is sort of an effort to make sure that some of the incorrect statements that are being put out, there are about patents and patent licensing are responded to and Tyler Burns just working now with the group just try to make sure that these statements are not being made in the total vacuum and there is some response, because a lot of the statements being made by these infringers and their lobbyists are really nonsense. Another thing though that has changed and people should understand that we are dealing with is that the law damages has quite significantly changed and we’re trying to respond to that and the way that this business used to work – it doesn’t quite work that way anymore.

Licenses now and the rates that you asked for in licenses are much, much more important in determining what a reasonable royalty rate is. So, even gets harder with us because we are a typical model as we license a portfolio and defendants would love to get in there and say, well, they licensed 100 patents, so, it’s at 1%, so they get 0.0001% for their patents and really quite ridiculous things like that.

So, we are having to adopt to that and develop new methodologies and new techniques that addressed the changes in damages law. So, I will stop there and hopefully that helps a little bit.

Sure, that does. And I guess the second item might benefit from some clarification is just the environment around the award of damages, the court costs and legal costs of the winner in court.

I was wondering if you could talk about what that?

Sure, okay. Well, in the 3GPP trial we just had, the rules are that if you lose which we did that you can be liable for some of the out-of-pocket costs.

So, these will be things like doing a display for the trial and things like that. So, we do anticipate that we may end up having to pay somewhere in the range $500,000, $600,000 to cover out-of-pocket costs.

There is another bucket though which are legal fees, the test to get legal fees is very onerous for the winner. They have to prove that the case was vexatious and frivolous, and we just don’t think there is any way that someone can make that case is in this case is something that’s on.

Nevertheless, it’s often the case in these types of things, the defendants are asking for their legal costs, we don’t think they are going to get them, but we have to fight that out.

Okay, that’s very helpful. Thank you.

Alright.

Thank you very much, operator. This concludes WiLAN’s second quarter 2013 financial results conference call.

A replay of this call will be available until 11:59 PM on November 6, 2013. Instructions for accessing the replay of this conference call can be found on the news release that was issued earlier today and on the WiLAN website.

Thank you for attending.