"Judge delays BlackBerry US shutdown"

I don't know, some people don't like mobile phones because it places them "at work" at any time of the day, in any location.

Some might quite like not having the Blackberry around for the same reason.

David.

There's not much financial incentive to prolong things in the scientific journal publication area. On the other hand theres a fairly enormous incentive in the patent world - after all the people best able to judge the worth of your patent would be your competitors....

Mark McIntyre

Forbe's claims that a settlement is imminent. But now that all of the patents have been invalidated, why would RIM want to settle unless the terms were highly favorable. It's unlikely that NTP will prevail on appeal, the deck is stacked against them.

RIM wants a one-time payment to NTP, while NTP wants to do licensing. The delays are giving RIM an opportunity to work around the NTP patents, should any of them ultimately be upheld.

In the meantime, more and more free 802.11 is being deployed, which is reducing the TAM for RIM.

While NTP has no case in the RIM dispute, there are still advantages in inventors being able to sell their patent rights to a company that can defend them.

It's quite clear that you don't understand the law if you've even read the case (which I doubt). NTP in fact has a strong legal position.

It obviously does, or it would have been thrown out of court, instead of getting favorable rulings. At least take the time to actually read the case, rather than just raving about things you know nothing about.

It's all rather insane. A judge rules that RIM violated patents that have been declared invalid, and has the power to shut down the service. Meanwhile RIM has to spend enormous amount of money on work-arounds to invalid patents, besides the legal costs. Eventually all of NTPs patents are likely to be permanently overturned.

Not sure if there's any good solution. Ensuring patent quality would be very expensive, and since most patents are never even used, it may be that the current system of simply allowing later litigation is the best we can hope for. Some have suggested a "loser pays" model, as is used in the U.K..

You don't understand the legal issues. (Why am I not surprised.) Try actually reading the case before spouting off (instead of relying on USA Today).

The judge seemed to come down hardest on RIM, which he said still refuses to acknowledge its 2002 court loss to NTP. Nothing RIM has done -- all the lobbying, patent re-examinations and appeals -- has "changed the reality of the jury verdict," the judge pointed out.

"The hallmark of sanity is to remain firmly tethered to reality. One unfortunate reality for RIM that they want to forget is that there was a trial." He added: "When all is said and done, RIM infringed on NTP's patents."

The hearing is the latest twist in a saga that began in 2001, when NTP warned RIM that it was infringing on its patent for a nationwide wireless e-mail system. A year later, a Virginia jury found RIM guilty of infringing on five patents belonging to NTP, a company set up by a Chicago inventor, Thomas Campana Jr., and his Virginia law firm. The jury awarded NTP damages, court costs and a 5.7-per-cent royalty on all sales -- a $126-million (U.S.) bill and counting. NTP balked at a $450-million settlement last year, and a deal now could top $1-billion.

RIM later lost on appeal, and failed to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

Hmmm. Good point.

Hopefully it won't go that far. The judge in this case seems to finally be considering the fact that a shutdown based on RIM's violation of invalid patents is not in anyone's best interest, including his own. Given that RIM would simply implement their work-around in the case of an adverse ruling, the judge would not even be able to force a shutdown.

If there is no settlement, then the whole thing will just muddle along for the next several years, as NTP appeals the invalidation of the patents. By that time, it won't make much difference.

Good article in eWeek, at "

The judge is actually taking normal judicial notice of the facts of the case, and putting normal pressure on the two parties to settle. He appears to be losing patience with the dangerous game of chicken that RIM has been playing.

That's by no means clear -- RIM has made conflicting statements about this, and there's been no real evidence that it can in fact easily work around the NTP patents. I consider it likely that NTP would challenge any such workaround, and that the judge might well issue a Temporary Injunction if he concludes that RIM isn't acting in good faith.

That's not the way the law works. RIM is actually down to endgame, having already lost on appeal all the way to the Supreme Court.

That's actually an op-ed piece by another unqualified person who doesn't understand either the law or the record of this case, and badly misstates the facts.

I wrote a really nice long reply and the power dies before I could save or post it. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

Tech journals have perhaps 200 articles per year that need peer reviews. The really technical rags (IEEE Journals) will have about 30 per issue or perhaps 400 per year. That can be handled by a small staff.

Meanwhile the USPTO has 150,000 patents per year to deal with. Just reading the patents takes me about 2 hours. My guess is a quick review and some light research will add about 10 hours. A 4 page report should burn another 4 hours. Total is 16 hours per patent (which I think is conservative). No patent goes through the first time, so the whole mess has to be done again when it's reviewed. Double the hours. A qualified rent-an-examiner probably will charge a low of $100/hr, so the grand total is: 150,000 * 32 hrs * $100/hr = $240 million per year for just reviewing these patents. Never mind the appeals. Well, the USPTO budget is $1.3 billion this year, so I guess might affort it.

And no battery backup. Oooooooooooppppppssssss..... ;)

The cost of proper review could probably be substantially defrayed by implementing a premium express service for those that can afford it and need it, much like the FDA is considering for drug approval applications.

UPS :-)

It's not like this really needs to be as authoritative as peer-review journals - though I would think more than two reviewers per patent, so your number probably is a fine first draft.

The costs of the review would have to be included in the patent fees. I don't see $3000 (more) for a patent application being a show stopper. If you aren't expecting to make that much off the patent, why bother patenting in the first place. It will, I'm sure, cut down the total number of applications by a huge factor.

Don't forget researching non-U.S. patents, as well as finding non-patented prior art.

It's be extremely expensive, and probably not very successful in stopping the kind of nonsense that NTP, and companies like it, engage in.

"Loser pays" in patent disputes might help. If NTP had had to pay all of RIM's legal costs for the invalidated patents, then maybe they'd have thought twice about pursuing this, though probably not. They probably thought that RIM would capitulate, rather than attacking the patents.

Probably not, as you'd know if you knew anything about the history of these patents.

Doubtful, since attaching the validity of patents is the standard defense.

Remember that companies knowingly apply for and receive patents which they are fully aware would be invalidated if challenged. I've worked for two companies that did that. During the interview, one of the founders of one company even acknowledged that the patent upon which the company was based would not hold up (in the interview I said something like, "but many companies have done the exact same thing you're doing").

You know that NTP was fully aware of the weakness of their patents, but they thought they could at least extract some money from RIM in order to avoid a court battle, and then once RIM paid up, they'd be in a position to demand that others also settle.

It's great that RIM decided not to buckle under to this blackmail. I hope that they follow it through to the end, though I think that they will likely decide to settle as NTP lowers its demands as their patents are permanently invalidated. When push comes to shove, NTP will be pragmatic, and settle for something, rather than prolong the battle and risk ending up with nothing.

I'm sure if you are willing to offer to pay for more researchers etc, the patient office would be glad to hire them... In our political climate, tax cuts for the coroperations and well healed are more important then improved government services. The current system favors the big corps who in turn fund congress, you think congress is going to but the hand that feeds them?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Welcome to the post Reagan era.

Well here you over simplify the case. NTP in a prior existance (bankrupptsy etc) did indeed make use of the patients. Recall (I'll bet you even had one) the little one liner pagers in the 80's. That was NTP's parents product. Just marketed poorly etc and the business failed. So yes, NTP is a paper corp, but its parent company wasn't.

Welcome to the post Reagan era (oops I already said that)

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.