Blackberry In Court Again Over Patents 185
uqbar writes "Looks like Research in Motion (RIM), the Canadian makers of the portable Blackberry email device, are back in court again. If patent holding company NTP wins their case, then RIM would be barred from selling Blackberry pagers in the US and would owe $54 million. Is this yet another case of overreaching patents gone amok?" We previously covered the original ruling in this case in August 2003.
overreaching? (Score:5, Funny)
Nah, it's not like Microsoft has patented double-clicking or something... oh wait...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:overreaching? (Score:2, Interesting)
I know it's a job I'd be interested in. Imagine seeing new ideas constantly flowing across your desk.
Re:overreaching? (Score:5, Interesting)
The irony is that now both parties and the judicial branch of the government will likely spend more money just sorting out the dilemma created by the greedy Patent Office's apathy. Not that the Patent Office cares. They already have their cash.
Re:overreaching? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have never filed for a patent before, so I am unsure of the exact process. However, I thought that fees associated with filing a patent were non-refunadable. Meaning that the USPTO will get their money whether or not the application is approved. Am I correct in this?
Re:overreaching? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they start rejectiong patents it would not take long for people to wise up and only file legitimate (define that how you would like) patents. Their income would fall rapidly.
Its amazing. Government is just like every company, species, etc. It grows as fast as it can given the enviroment. We need Libertarian pricipals so that we can check this, cutting fat inefficient agencies. This is just as predators check the rabit population.
Re:overreaching? (Score:5, Funny)
Right (Score:2)
Then the corporations (who are barely held in check by said govt that you've nuetered) will suddenly adhere to ethical standards [tpj.org], avoid polluting the environment [bhopal.com], and cease exploiting workers [local6.com]. Everyone will be free and happy! Weeee!!!
Pass the crak pipe, bub. No sense in you getting all the hallucinations.
what's the libertarian solution, then? (Score:2)
So, please tell us, what would the "libertarian" response to patents be? According to libertarians, should patents be abolished entirely? What about copyrights? And if libertarians want to keep patents and copyrights but reduce government, who get
Re:overreaching? (Score:5, Informative)
Here is the full fee schedule [uspto.gov]. Fees of note: filing fee is $770. Issue fee is $1,330. Maintenance fees are $990, $2,090, and $3,220. There are also fees for publication ($300), filing an assignment ($40), for filing excess claims (more than 20), filing late responses to the patent office, and many more. In general, "small entities" pay half of the amount listed above, though there are exceptions.
Re:overreaching? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:overreaching? (Score:4, Insightful)
That would keep me from ever applying for a patent. I've come up with a lot of neat ideas. When I tell someone who's been working in the field about them, I find out that, yeah, they've been doing that for years.
For example, at ten or eleven years old, I thought of storing video as only the differences between each frame. I'd never heard of it before, but it sounded like a good idea to me. Then I came to find out they've been doing that for a long time.
Or another example...I recently posted a journal entry [slashdot.org] about a roleplaying tool I want to write. Someone mentioned that that tool was pretty much a stripped-down MUD with some side features. I've never used a MUD before, and I'm not familiar with their features.
I'd also given thought about using interference between two inaudible waveforms to produce an audible signal. Well, we've seen that one posted on Slashdot.
I've about given up trying to come up with original ideas...someone else has already had them. And if you fine me for trying to patent something I think is original, it becomes completely uneconomical for me to try to come up with ideas for money.
Re:overreaching? (Score:2)
Re:overreaching? (Score:2, Interesting)
You could even have a collected database of unpatented prior art and existing patents that is available for searching.
Then upon submission, a computer could compare the information in the patent to existing patents and return a list of possible prior art or patents.
Once you receive the list, you would need to re-assert that your patent does not duplicate any of the items listed.
If after that, the human reviewer deems otherwise, it would be a strike against you. Fines would be appropriate after a
first come, first serve thinking (Score:2)
Re:first come, first serve thinking (Score:2)
Actually, the problem is that "normal" meatspace patents are fairly straight forward in inplementation. You can break out the blueprints [often included in the patent!] and compare your new idea to theirs. Much of the "innovation" the patent office claims is because your new hack around the current patent holder is ALSO patentable!! But with software, the author cites the results and locks the code up as "trad
Re:overreaching? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's why I've been saying that the PTO should be sued everytime an invalid patent is found that caused financial loss to a defendant having to prove it invalid.
Re:overreaching? (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, I doubt after one or two they would keep granting bogus patents and maybe even start reviewing old ones once they realize they are a liability....
Re:overreaching? (Score:3, Insightful)
And it is, as another poster said, also the effect of lawyers becoming so heavily involved. Like it or not, our world is increasingly run by lawyers and economists, who have
makes money too when it rejects (Score:2)
the PTO gets paid almost every time.
examiners don't get paid more for rejecting, any more than they do for allowances.
Re:overreaching? (Score:2)
While I enjoy blaming the gubment as much as anybody, in this case I think you need to look at the lawyers. Who approves all the bogus and conflicting patents which lead to costly lawsuits? The USPTO. Who is the largest employer of intellectual property [abanet.org]
Re:overreaching? (Score:3, Funny)
Exiting models? (Score:5, Funny)
FreeEEEDOM!!!
Or better yet, maybe my Blackberry will have to meet a certain 'accidental' demise, and they will be unable to give me a new one due to this patent hearing.
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
just receive text messages or what? and what's the patent about
Haven't seen a real 'pager' in years(replaced by gsm phones)...
Re:Exiting models? (Score:1)
Re:Exiting models? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Exiting models? (Score:5, Informative)
Simple, really. They do one thing, e-mail, and do it well. Very well. Better than anyone else. It is easy to use. They have the common use case down cold.
E-mail is the golden nugget. PDAs, even wirelessly enabled PDAs, are a dime a dozen. Heck, even cell phones are a commodity - cell providers have to give away the product in order to get people to buy the service.
Having a Blackberry will save you an hour a day. The competion is clunkier and harder to use. They don't call 'em "Crackberry" for nothing.
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
Yeah, RIM's product is the integration with the back end. A secure corporate email solution? There's only one out there. Nobody seems to be able to figure this out... it's so f*ing obvious. I thought RIM would have died years ago when Motorola started doing RIM-like devices and Palms began incorporating wireless. But both of them stuck to a fancy-email and text messaging cell-phone kind of business model rather than a "interfaces with your corporate mail server" business model.
RIM's R&D is moving
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
Danger's Hiptop also does e-mail really well, and it also does web browsing really well, and instant messaging, and it has a flat fee.
Smartphones like those from Palm also do e-mail really well.
The competion is clunkier and harder to use.
That's a matter of opinion, not fact. One thing that is not a matter of opinion, however, is that the competition is cheaper. And, unlike RIM, the competition hasn't sued
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
Still, I prefer my Palm T3 for
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
New York City employees had some.
They kept working in Manhattan on 9/11.
Instant bulletproof reputation.
Really ticked off the palm.net guys, who are on the same network, but didn't benefit from the war stories.
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
Not quite (Score:5, Insightful)
Doctors still carry them for two reasons: first of all, they're safe. Pagers have been in use for decades and are known to generally not interfere with hospital equipment (unlike GSM phones, which can cause really weird behaviour in some monitoring equipment). And secondly, they're reliable. In an emergency situation, when everybody grabs their cell to check on their loved ones cell coverage usually drops to 0% in a jiffie (yes, I know that GSM networks can be configured to prioritize certain SIMs through the HLR but I can tell you from experience that that doesn't really work reliably). Pagers, on the other hand, don't need a lot of bandwidth and work reliably.
Having said that, Blackberrys were a nice idea when they were first introduced. These days, though they're useless without effective filtering. I am subscribed to a bunch of mailing lists and I don't particularly like the idea of staring at a small b/w device for long periods of time to find that one important email I happen to be looking for. That's especially true if I have instant access to my IMAP account using my PDA (using WiFi, which tends to drain the battery, or my cell phone). Plus, around here, there's usually a computer nearby no matter where I go.
Re:Not quite (Score:2)
Good, since Blackberrys have color screens, you shouldn't have a problem.
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2)
Yes, you can. But the blackberry has only limited functionality on the client device. The device has a browser, but the more complex things (like cookies) are implemented on a middleware server. Custom applications may also be implemented on the middleware server. No retail consumer would ever be interested in this device, but its ease of use and customization-capability makes it somewhat attractive to corporations.
Re:Exiting models? (Score:3, Interesting)
They can even do GPS tracking with the things.
Incidentally, I can't think there's anything about this device that's patent-worthy. The use of a new networking technology (in this case DPMS or whatever the IP-over-cell-phone protocol is) to do the same old networking stuff isn't patentable, since it's such an obvious application.
T
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Exiting models? (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer? p ag ename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1 086559808952&call_pageid=968350072197&col=96904886 3851
The most interesting quote is this:
"My guess is that rather than an injunction, NTP would rather have ongoing royalties," said Marc Kaufman, a patent lawyer with Nixon Peabody in Washington. "The time you really want an injunction is when you
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Same case, this is the appeal. (Score:4, Informative)
The Register and a few other newsies reported that RIM and NTP have tried to come to a royalty agreement, but so far have not budged.
You can bet as soon as RIM loses this appeal (likely), they will very quickly come up with a royalty agreement for NTP, and life will go on.
IANAL. I play one on slashdot.
Re:Same case, this is the appeal. (Score:5, Funny)
lets analyze.
First word: Blackberry
Who is this article about? Blackberry.
Second+Third word: In Court
Where is Blackberry? In Court
Fourth word: Again
So they have been there before? Is this a continuation of the previous dispute? Yes and yes.
Fifth+Sixth word: Over Patents
Why was Blackberry in court again? Over Patents
Now, why was this misleading?
Re:Same case, this is the appeal. (Score:2, Redundant)
lets analyze.
Note I prefaced the term "misleading" with "a bit"
"a bit"
Defined as : A small portion, degree, or amount.
So if we were to rework your statement to reflect the original context in which I used it:
"Now, why was this a bit misleading?"
I would say because "In Court Again" implies that they left court the first time. The phrase "In Court Again" implies there is a new reason for them to be in court. The reality is they never left, this is a contin
Re:Same case, this is the appeal. (Score:2)
I would say because "In Court Again" implies that they left court the first time.
They did. They are now in an appeals court. Sure, it's more or less the same topic, but a decision was made the first time they were in court. It's not like they are still waiting for that initial decision.
It's a new business model... (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, I think Microsoft got that patented, scratch that.
Re:It's a new business model... (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft may have the patent, but I thought they sold an exclusive license to SCO for this new "sue them into oblivion" technology.
In other news, MS has announced a fatal flaw in their "sue them into oblivion" technology, and will be releasing a service pack sometime in the next 90 days. seems in the current version you actuallly have to have a case.
Re:It's a new business model... (Score:4, Insightful)
MikeRoweSoft.com (Score:2, Informative)
Re:MikeRoweSoft.com (Score:3, Informative)
Both of them are trademark cases, and while they can be a bit of a nuisance, they aren't anything like as bad as patent cases. It's usually possible to work round a trademark violation - you can change the name. Can cost a bit of money, and is a pain if you have built up brand recognition under the old name, but it can be done.
Patents, on the other hand usually can't be worked around without making your product inferior to the competition.
Re:It's a new business model... (Score:2)
Re:It's a new business model... (Score:2)
Re:It's a new business model... (Score:2)
Prior Art (Score:5, Insightful)
CEO's response (Score:4, Funny)
Operation Hammertime [operationhammertime.org]
Re:CEO's response (Score:2)
Freedom... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Freedom... (Score:1)
Re:Freedom... (Score:2)
Re:Freedom... (Score:2, Informative)
lyrics and info [matrix.com.br]
Source of the quote (Score:3, Informative)
- Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster
from "Me and Bobby McGee"
(popularized by the late, great Janis Joplin)
I guess this means... (Score:3, Funny)
Should be a time limitation! (Score:5, Insightful)
Are we to believe they hadn't heard of the Blackberry until recently? Ludicrous!
Re:Should be a time limitation! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's simple. They are allowed because they make lawyers and the court system a lot of money.
Re:Should be a time limitation! (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Should be a time limitation! (Score:3, Informative)
A lot of the precidents in cases s
What goes around comes around (Score:5, Interesting)
So I have a bit less sympathy for them. What goes around comes around.
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:3, Insightful)
I also do not care very much for a company that sell product that are overpriced and who did not innovate very much since the launch of their first product.
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:2)
[the above should be read with a heavy english accent, to visions of a co-worker being humorously pummeled over the head with such a keyboard]
i can only imagine what this specific lawsuit is about. Displaying "emoticons" on a limited resource computing device? Brilliant!
fscking fsckers.
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:4, Informative)
Yup. That's how they got the nickname, "Lawsuits in Motion". Let's not forget about RIM Park [waterloo.on.ca], which they managed to weasel their name on to despite the city's population having to pay an additional $35.26 [waterloo.on.ca] tax (5.47% of taxes overall) just to cover the city's funding of the park. Can someone explain to me how you can get your name on a park without either paying for the whole thing, or being a dead celebrity?
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:2)
Palm isn't original either (Score:2)
curved keyboard? (Score:3, Informative)
Who'd have thunk it? [rydia.net]
That's never been patented, has it? [rydia.net] Not while people had sense, that is. It's so surprising that people find new keyboards.
How about spherical? (Score:2)
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:4, Informative)
RIM (specifically Mike Lazaridis) put a lot of effort into perfecting that keyboard for thumb typing and it is what the blackberry was built around. So yes, there was a lot of innovation there. It seems simple now, but at the time, it was a novel idea.
Of course, I may be biased here because RIM was founded and is based right beside where I go to school (U of Waterloo), and they contribute a lot to and hire a lot of students from said school.
Re:What goes around comes around (Score:3, Insightful)
Ohh! A novel implementation of a keyboard. Wowie zowie! Heard of the "twiddler"?
Just because you've invested a lot of time reasearching something you don't have an automatic monopoly on it.
Can you imagine if Fender had patented the Stratocaster guitar shap
Again, I refer to two organizations.. (Score:4, Informative)
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
What a silly patent. (Score:5, Informative)
Does this mean that every time I use wlan0 instead of eth0 to check my mail I'm infringing on their patent?
More generally, I would think the Amateur Packet Radio people would have some prior art on this. APR has been around for a while, I think... and certainly someone has used it to check mail.
Re:What a silly patent. (Score:2)
Prior Art (Score:5, Informative)
Well it's at least been used for that purpose since 1987. I think that's the first time I saw two BBSes being connected using amateur radio equipment. Must have been two Fidonet boxes. The connection wasn't quite stable but it worked.
Courtesy (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Courtesy (Score:2, Funny)
Live by the patent, die by the patent (Score:4, Insightful)
How would I know? (Score:2)
Being that I'm not a patent lawyer, nor can I be considered an expert on patent law, I think I'm speaking for all of Slashdot when I say "I don't know. Can you give me more information about it?"
Just sit back and wait. (Score:3, Insightful)
I've decided that the best thing now would be for the whole computer industry just to stop and wait for twenty years. When all these stupid patents finally expire, then the rest of us can start actually doing stuff with our computers. Until then, we may as well all just go home, because as I see it, just about anything I do is going to tread on someone's intellecual property. (and I use the word 'intellectual' in it's loosest possible sense)
Just a thought. (Score:5, Insightful)
Luckily I live in Europe...
But will the European Union adopt the same madness as the US? If this becomes the case we will see new technology evolve in Asia... (did anyone mention China?)
Just a thought.
Translation (Score:3, Insightful)
Really folks, the very mention of the word patent here results in typical anti-IP diatribes; often neglecting what is actually actually debatable and interesting: the merits of the patent in question, its defensibiblty and its consequences.
The poster's asking himself the aforequoted question betrays he didn't even bother to read the patent.
Is it time to add "-1 RTFP" as a moderation type?
Re:Translation (Score:2)
actually debatable and interesting: the merits of the patent in question, its defensibiblty and its consequences.
What is debatable and interesting is the merit of software patents in general, not this particular patent. Not on us to "prove" this patent is valueless. This patent is almost certainly garbage and not worth talking about. The onus is on the patent holder to prove they are entitled to monopolise some piece of technology.
I really hate the way that the patent office, lawyers and some big bus
Re:Translation (Score:2)
The irony here is incredible. NTP is not owned by "big business types" (everyone here seems to assume this). NTP is a holding company for the intellectual property creator, Thomas Campana and his partners. FYI, he is a retired electrical engineer with 50 patents to his name. You, as a intellect
Re:Translation (Score:2)
Bullshit. I've just scanned the patents [uspto.gov]. (numbers 5,625,670 [uspto.gov]; 5,631,946 [uspto.gov]; 5,819,172 [uspto.gov]; 6,067,451 [uspto.gov] and 6,317,592 [uspto.gov]). They're trash and completely uninnovative. Whether you like it or not the use of the radio spectrum to transmit email with addressing is obvious and should never have been monopolised in this way.
Also, like many patent office boosters you appear to be confusing the creation of intellectual property with the granting of a patent. Without getting into the semantics (I don't care whether it's called
these patents (Score:2)
The consequences? If these patents stand, they potentially threaten a lot of mobile text-base
Re:these patents (Score:2)
So, the conclusions of "people here" should outweigh the fact that the jury found RIM guilty of willful infringement? The opinions of "people here" should nullify the Appeals court upholding the ruling?
Perhaps you should look at the patents yourself some time. If you come to the conclusion that they are defensible,
Re:these patents (Score:2)
You seem to have trouble with the concepts of "debate" and "discourse" in a democratic society. People can debate legal opinions, and, over the course of years and decades, US courts will start to align with public opinion. That's, for example, how racial equality was achieved in the US: if it hadn't been
All Patents Baaaaaad! (Score:2)
Re:All Patents Baaaaaad! (Score:2)
all patents are baaaaad!
By default, yes. They are interference by the government in the citizen's business. The onus is on the patent holder to show why they have a god-given right to monopolise some piece of technology. The vast majority software patents I've seen are nothing more than a means for lawyers and the patent office to make money on. Parasites trying to make money my, and other intellectual property creators', hard work. They are scum.
---
It's wrong that an intellectual property creator
second verse of the SAME case (Score:3, Insightful)
So the patent is certainly sufficient to pass the smell-test.
They are now before the Federal Circuit to determine whether the court errred below, Blackberry's last gasp to survive.
time will tell whether the plaintiff will prevail at this point, but overreaching, after a full trial on the merits? you have got to be an ideologue even to ask the question.
Re:second verse of the SAME case (Score:2)
time will tell whether the plaintiff will prevail at this point, but overreaching, after a full trial on the merits? you have got to be an ideologue even t
if it is halfway cool and enabling.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Does anyone (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So just (Score:3, Funny)
Thbbbbtttttt!!!!!
Re:So just (Score:3, Informative)
But it's not.
Trademarks are what you call something; patents are what it does.