Court disappointed with RIM and NTP?s inability to reach a settlement
A US judge has delayed ruling on the shutdown of RIM?s BlackBerry network yesterday, extending an already long running patent dispute with NTP.
Judge James Spencer of the US District Court in Richmond is reported to have said that he was disappointed with RIM and NTP?s inability to reach a settlement but had decided to first rule on damages in the case, before deciding on a shutdown.
Earlier in the day, the US Patent and Trademark Office had issued a final rejection of the third NTP patent that forms the basis of the company's complaint against RIM, but Spencer said this would not affect his ruling.
I am grateful that Judge Spencer is allowing RIM a little more time to settle with NTP. Like many of us who own and use Blackberry devices, I don't want anything to interfere with my Blackberry service.
Yes, I know and I have read all about it. I've also been checking with wireless provider regarding the possible update / workaround. Still, I thank you for the reply.
Appears to that the Patent claim by NTP Inc. is bogus and complete crap. The only winners in this gig are the Lawyers. I hope RIM takes NTP to court after this and sues the pants off them.
Is it any wonder lawyers would prefer a commie device? Even being a "thumb" luddite who rejects the new paradigm of stylus? The industrial policy "Solidarity" fund behind BlackBerry RIM, FondsFTQ.Com is part of the "Grand" Socialist Urban Renewal InnovatechQuebec.Com of Quebec. They not only stole USA patents, they never played fair, they were never on a level playing field because their funding was purely socialistic. Take your pinko neighbor's PinkBerry and smash it! Smash his face, too, for supporting socialism!
- = - Vasos-Peter John Panagiotopoulos II, Columbia'81+, Bio$trategist BachMozart ReaganQuayle EvrytanoKastorian
formatting link
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}--- [Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Remorse begets zeal] [Windows is for Bimbos] [Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
"Copyright"? It's supposed to be _patent_ infringement - and while the judge says they clearly infringed the patents, the Patent Office has now said all the patents are invalid. Appeals to follow...
Hardly. The US Patent Office has essentially said that NTP _stole_ somebody else's work, and patented it. I guess you have a good point - that _is_ the capitalist way.
Recall RIM lied in front of the jury in the first trial, that hardly helped their case.
I'm also not clear on how push email had prior art to NTP's claim on it in the l80's with those little one liner pagers they sold? Clearly they beat RIM to the idea and had RIM not done exactly what everyone is so down on NTP for then this whole thing would never have happened. I hope NTP succeeds in cleaning RIM's bank accounts in a serious manner. NTP is wrong, but RIM is more so. Lied and started the patient case to begin by going after little guys with similar technology.
I don't recall - I came late to this. I don't have a Blackberry, can't see myself ever having a Blackberry, and have little real interest whether RIM wins or loses.
Even if true, NTP doesn't deserve to win anything if they never had a valid patent. The real problem in this is that the US patent office makes no attempt to properly validate patents at the time of application. They should operate like a scientific journal and send applications to referees before approving them in the first place.
Welcome to the wonderful world of patent reform. The basic question is currently whether the validity and enforceability (they're different) of a patent should be determined before the patent is issued, as it was before about 1985, or determined in the courts after the patent is issued, as it is currently done. In the distant past, it was necessary to actually demonstrate to the patent office that the invention actually worked. That would be impossible in todays system. In the not so distant past, it was necessary to do a patent search to insure that there were no conflicting claims or prior art. This is still being done, but not as rigorously as before largely due to lack of patent office funding. The current position of the PTO is to issue patents with potential undiscovered conflicts, and let the courts settle these conflicts when found. In other words, the patent has simply become a license to sue. Were your suggested rigorous review reinstated, the patent process would become rediculously expensive and take forever.
You should care. It's not really about RIM versus NTP. It's about whether a company that has busted its ass making a technology work, can survive in the courts against a paper company that hasn't done anything other than buy a bunch of dubiously conflicting patents and sue. It's just one of many such issues that point to the necessity of patent reform.
Where it all comes home is American innovation. We have successfully outsourced almost everything that made America an industrial power, except innovation. According to the pundits, that's the one thing that the US has over the much lower cost 3rd world countries. However, innovation isn't going to last very long when the patent system can't seem to recognize the distinction between a real innovative company and a paper tiger. Why would anyone invest in a technology or product if some speculators could simply buy up a bunch of dubiously conflicting patents and go into the extortion business with the help of the PTO? If you want innovation, it must be protected. Otherwise, it will be outsourced with everything else until the US simply becomes the worlds most lavish consumer.
(Yeah, I know you're Canadian but you get the idea).
Patent holders usually know when their patent is weak, and collect what royalties they can without forcing the issue. One company I worked for had a very profitable patent in terms of royalties, but we wouldn't sue companies in Asia that were violating the patent. It was explained to us that if we sued, we'd likely lose, and then all the royalties we were getting would cease. It was better to simply do nothing. We reminded our customers that they could not use the competitors parts in products for the U.S. market due to patent infringement, and that was enough.
NTP may well end up with nothing when this process is over, rather than having settled for something reasonable.
Yep, that's all too common. I had a customer that manufactured specialized drills. The design was patented and apparently sufficiently exotic to considered a bullet proof patent. A very large competitor decides to just clone his design on the assumption that he doesn't have the resources to sue. He sued, burned $250,000 on litigation, travel, attorneys, and expert witnesses. After 6 years and 4 changes of venue, the judges ruled that the patent was truely valid, but that is was "unenforceable" due to some really trivial technicalities. (The protective coating was not specified in the patent).
It might actually be a good thing if NTP wins and Blackberry shuts down. The public and press outcry is sure to be rather loud and difficult to ignore. If it percipitates patent reform, then sacrificing a productive company for the benifit of speculators might actually be considered benificial.
Ironically, the companies that were paying us royalties were encouraging us to go after the patent violators in Asia, because they were being affected more than we were in terms of lost sales. It's a fine line that you have to walk when you're not confident that your patent will hold up under scrutiny. You don't risk tens of millions of dollars in royalties unless you're very confident of a patent's validity.
Highly unlikely that it will cause patent reform under the current political climate. Big business greatly benefits from the current mess, since they have the resources to crush small patent-holders.
I don't believe that. I'm suggesting a refereed system exactly like scientific journals use - this hasn't made research prohibitively expensive (or slow), and I see no reason why it should make patents so.
Exactly. I'm not saying I don't care - simply that I don't think I have any particular axe to grind in this case. It will make no personal difference to me if RIM survives or not (or, for that matter, if NTP survives or not). I do feel quite strongly that a lot of things are being patented that should never have been, and that something has to be done to stop patent pirates. otoh, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster claims that there's a direct inverse relationship between the number of pirates and global warming. Maybe more patent pirates will stop global warming...
Agreed.
I do. We are, to a large extent, following blindly down the patent trail you've blazed. American innovation, Canadian blind stupidity.
[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
I agree that it would actually be a good thing if NTP wins and Blackberry shuts down, but for a different reason: RIM deserves to be punished for its conduct. Take the time to read the court record before picking a side. Regardless, I'm quite sure that ways will be found for life to go on for users.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.