Articles
Advice of the Day (Forum)
Books (Forum)
Druidic Ramblings (Forum)
Dumb Ideas (Forum)
H-Town (Forum)
Links (Forum)
Movies (Forum)
Music (Forum)
Opinions (Forum)
Photo Albums (Forum)
Prose/Poetry (Forum)
Questions (Forum)
Video Games (Forum)
Member Login

Username

Password

Register Here

Forum
 

Forum posts for RIM vs. NTP

Okay
Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2006
That was too long an article for me to read right now.

But from what I understand, even without the sob story about the guy that came up with the idea, the patent is just for 'wireless email' isn't it?

I call bullshit on any patent that's just an idea you can't product. Otherwise why can't I just go patent any idea for something I know is feasible, but just can't figure out the details for yet? I though the whole point of the patent system was to protect the details.

.
Posted by phduffy on Feb 24, 2006
Read the part about RIM's court demonstration. And how they set it up to show that you could do wireless email between two 1987 laptops.

Only, OOPS!, they installed newer software on them and didn't tell the judge or the jury or anyone. And if they hadn't done that, their demonstration wouldn't have worked.

Yeah...okay
Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2006
But what was the patent on? The technology in terms of hardware, or the technology in terms of software?

I just think NTP had such a vague patent on a thread of an idea that it should just be thrown out of court.

Does anyone have a link to the NTP patent? I'm curious to read just what they patented.

From other things I'd read, the company is known to patent things, vague ideas, just outside the tech curve, then sue people that actualize that idea. Granted, they're supposedly one of many companies that do that, but it's pretty deplorable.

from the source
Posted by Katie on Feb 24, 2006
Pete, from what I've been told by some higher ups at RIM, that is exactly their feeling about NTP as well.

They've just created all these patents in order to sit on them and cash in on a lucrative lawsuit like this.

I also didn't have a chance to read the whole article, and of course hearing RIM's side of the story is going to be biased, but it does seem like that was the modus operandi for NTP. Not too above board in my mind. But, RIM should probably have been a lot more diligent and not just brushed this situation off.


Oh
Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2006
Oh yeah, for sure if given the chance, they should have just settled it on the cheap when they could have.

Though I'm wondering if they amount asked for originally was perhaps more considerable at that time in the companies life.

.
Posted by phduffy on Feb 24, 2006
Guys, seriously, RTFA.

This is driven by one guy, who's now dead, who had the patent.
I thought NTP was just some troll company too, but I'm no longer convinced that's the case.

Okay
Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2006
The company was never about making things or selling things. It was about protecting potentially valuable ideas, some of which dealt with sending messages to wireless devices. And for nearly a decade, Mr. Campana's patents lay dormant, just waiting for RIM to produce the BlackBerry.


Protecting my ass. Capitalizing on other people's efforts is more like it.

Come on, I don't give a shit that it was one guy's idea. He had a loose idea, but didn't seem to be able to finish or pull it off.

Another company did. They developped the technology and the software.

Yo Duffy
Posted by bryan on Feb 24, 2006
I RTFA.

RIM are assholes.

They used newer software in a legal demonstration.

using "THREAT OF INTERNATIONAL TERRRORISM" as a defence. Bad RIM!

BUT:

they are right. Patent holder dude never had a tangible product, from what i gathered in the article. Check out this shiz:

"There's a tremendous amount of innovation and hard work that goes into taking an idea and realizing it and then making it into a product," Mr. Lazaridis says defiantly. "There are 16 million lines of code in BlackBerry. Sixteen million. It's hard to imagine 16 million lines of code. They all have to work in harmony and perfection to make this thing do its job. Are you trying to tell me that one little concept is more important than another little concept, and that it didn't take man-years and man-years of effort to make all that stuff work?"

.
Posted by phduffy on Feb 24, 2006
I don't know.
If you read the part before nerhael's quote, you'll see that they invented and sold:

. The two companies developed more innovations to ESA's paging system, including one that could receive up to 14 text messages with a maximum of 500 characters each. That was followed by a device called "Child Finder" that used pager technology to help parents to monitor the movements of their small children.

They had a working product, it's not just some patent documents in a drawer.


...
Posted by bryan on Feb 24, 2006
plain text does not equal email.

the problem..
Posted by bryan on Feb 24, 2006
The real problem is the overly litigous culture created by IP laws. In my opinion.

My $0.02
Posted by pudding on Feb 24, 2006
I am not going to read the article because I am cooking and don't have time to spare, but we were talking about this at work, and apparently RIM had two chances to settle this suit... for "small" amounts compared to now... I am throwing out a number but I think the original settlement offer was NTP was $20M.

Anyways, I agree with Pete. Patent something you can hold or see... not something a weirdo can think up and hold on as a chip to cash in when someone smarter figured out a way to DO it.

Now go and buy a Blackberry to help support RIM's legal battle!