BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-01-2005, 08:45 PM   #41 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Model: 8700C
Carrier: Cingular
Posts: 54
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Please Login to Remove!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon
4. Even if worse comes to worse, the U.S. government - by way of DOJ - is on RIM's side.
I think the DOJ is on the DOJ's side (the whole govt's side, for that matter). It isn't that they favor RIM or defend RIM in any way--they just don't want to lose their Blackberry devices, regardless of patent problems.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 03:24 PM   #42 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Model: 7100
Posts: 9
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

[quote=Jase88]The technical workaround exists: I'm familiar with the details, and from what I understand, it won't significantly impact the performance of Blackberry.

Jase88,

How where you able to see the details of the workaround? Can you direct us to this information?

I am still not convinced that it is a solution. NTP has very strong patents - i am curious to see how RIM can workaround these patents without compromising their system.

Also, the workaround will have to be proven in court prior to use.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 03:30 PM   #43 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: 8700
Carrier: t-mobile
Posts: 125
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1RIM4sure
Also, the workaround will have to be proven in court prior to use.
Why would it have to be proven in court? they impliment it, then its up to NTP to prove it infringes on their patent, from my basic understanding of the suit.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 04:05 PM   #44 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Model: 7100
Posts: 9
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

My understanding was that during the injuction hearing, RIM will be able to present the workaround as an alternative to injunction. The court will have to then determine whether or not the workaround violates NTP patents. Otherwise, RIM could conitnue to make a minor tweeks to their technology, and NTP would have to go through the long process over and over.

If the workaround is actually enough of a change as to not infringe on NTP, then RIM is in good shape. This is why better understanding the specifics of the workaround would shed some light on the subject.

Last edited by 1RIM4sure : 12-05-2005 at 04:21 PM.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 04:33 PM   #45 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
nb_mitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Model: 8310
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 678
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1RIM4sure
I am still not convinced that it is a solution. NTP has very strong patents
From what I have read over the last 3 months, the patents are crap and the Patent office has already rejected them all in their preliminary findings. I don't understand why the Judge won't wait until the Patent office finishes it findings, it seems like the case would be much clearer then and ruling much more valid and harder to appeal from either side.

But then I am just a simple person, with a simple mind, that agrees with the saying "What are 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?" answer, "A good start" (from the disney movie "Hook")
__________________
Mitch
8310 / New Beetle / 2006 Triumph Daytona 675 / Give Kids the World
Me @ GKTW on my D675
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 05:09 PM   #46 (permalink)
Retired BBF Moderator
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Model: Bold
Carrier: Rogers
Posts: 4,870
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf747
What about Deaf users? I signed a 1 year deal. What if the service gets cut off before 1 year is up? I'm using a 6230 and it appears that I'll be out in the cold when (if) it happens.
They are not going to shut down (except a small chance of a brief temporary-only shutdown), read my first post. It is simple brinkmanship.
__________________
Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
Author of XMPP extension XEP-0301:
www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0301.html - specification
www.realjabber.org - open source
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 05:26 PM   #47 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Model: 7100
Posts: 9
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Mitch,

i like that joke - i am going to forward it to some of my lawyer friends.

From what i have read, the judge has to rule on the case based on the patents that are in place. The actions of the trademark and patent office are exclusive from those of the courts.

The patent challenges in the trademark and patent office could take years to be decided, and the courts can not be expect to be at the mercy of this process.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 05:48 PM   #48 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
nb_mitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Model: 8310
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 678
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

From what I have read, the Patent Office is expect to make a final judgement in the next 3 months, so what if the court waits a few months to make the right decission. I understand there is also an appeals process in the Patent Office, but it just seems wrong to make any decission in mid-stream.

If the Patent's Office voids all of the patents after the judge rules in favor of NTP, then does that start the process all over? Does NTP have to give back the money they wrongfully gained?

If the Patent's Office determines the patents are valid, that would give NTP much more strenght and make the judges decission much stronger in the following court appeals or maybe make a settlement more likely.
__________________
Mitch
8310 / New Beetle / 2006 Triumph Daytona 675 / Give Kids the World
Me @ GKTW on my D675
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 06:12 PM   #49 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Waterloo: Home of RIM
Model: PlayB
Carrier: Bell Mobility
Posts: 1,008
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

[quote=1RIM4sure]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jase88
The technical workaround exists: I'm familiar with the details, and from what I understand, it won't significantly impact the performance of Blackberry.

Jase88,

How where you able to see the details of the workaround? Can you direct us to this information?

I am still not convinced that it is a solution. NTP has very strong patents - i am curious to see how RIM can workaround these patents without compromising their system.

Also, the workaround will have to be proven in court prior to use.
There is nothing public regarding the workaround, other than it exists.
Offline  
Old 12-05-2005, 07:20 PM   #50 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Model: 7100
Posts: 9
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I understand that there is nothing public about the workaround. Yet, you were able to get the details? Am i to assume that you work at RIM?

The fact that RIM says it exists doesn't mean much.

It can exist and hinder the quality of the current system - i am sure we would all agree that this is unacceptable. RIM's great push email is what makes it superior - changing the system could cause problems.

Or it could exist and still violate the patent. Therefore, it would be useless.

The only way a workaround matter is if it exists and does NOT hinder quality and is NOT in violation of NTP patents.
In order to determine whether these conditions are true, we would need to know more about the details.
Offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 09:14 AM   #51 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Model: 8800c
Carrier: Cingular
Posts: 970
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

As for the patents, why speculate when the judge already explained why he is moving ahead with the case based upon the patents originally being issued. He is well aware of the patent dispute.

If RIM had a seamless workaround, don't you think it would have been deployed, at least partially, to calm investors. I'm sure these are smart guys and have a trick up thier sleeve but if they were willing to force a settlement for $450m, their solution isn't cheap or easy.

If they deployed now, the only issue would be the cost to settle NTP claims with no threat of shutdown. They can probably stall that since there isn't an ongoing dispute of RIM still using the technology until the patents are settled. Investors would have confidence and the stock would soar. Users would be happy and the time nd money companies are investing to find alternates would be dropped. Think of the number of companies forced to seriously look at Good, MS and others when these other vendors might well not have been able to get a serious look or a foot in the door.

Regards-Michael G.
Offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 12:28 PM   #52 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Model: 9530
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 302
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I asked one of my patent attorneys about this, and he said that if all the patents are struck down in a final ruling after a settlement is reached, RIM still loses that money. They just would not have to pay any royalties if that was part of the agreement. He believes the patents will be struck down, but not before RIM pays up to a billion dollars to settle. He just upgraded his Blackberry to a 7130 so he's not too worried.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nb_mitch
If the Patent's Office voids all of the patents after the judge rules in favor of NTP, then does that start the process all over? Does NTP have to give back the money they wrongfully gained?
Offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 03:35 PM   #53 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: 8700
Carrier: t-mobile
Posts: 125
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1RIM4sure
I understand that there is nothing public about the workaround. Yet, you were able to get the details? Am i to assume that you work at RIM?
you sound like you work for NTP or are hoping for RIM to lose..

Quote:
Or it could exist and still violate the patent. Therefore, it would be useless.
It would be useless for RIM to lie about this. If they roll out the change and it does violate the patent, there would be tons of people ready for a class action suit against RIM. I'm sure they've crossed all their T's and dotted their I's. They have a contingency plan in place. It would be stupid for them to unveil it before they were required to. It would give more people time to examine it before a final ruling was made, or a judge could try to order them to turn it off at the same time as they were ordered to shut down the original.

Quote:
The only way a workaround matter is if it exists and does NOT hinder quality and is NOT in violation of NTP patents.
In order to determine whether these conditions are true, we would need to know more about the details.
I don't know all the details about how a phone works, but it does. If my blackberry continues to work much like it does now, I don't care about the details. I just care that it works
Offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 05:23 PM   #54 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Model: 7100
Posts: 9
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by goaliemn
you sound like you work for NTP or are hoping for RIM to lose..

I think i sound more like somebody trying to understand the details rather than just mindlessly believing everything i hear or read in the news. You claimed you were familiar with the details, but it seems you meant that you only know one detail - it exists.
Quote:
I If they roll out the change and it does violate the patent, there would be tons of people ready for a class action suit against RIM
I think you have misinterpreted the way these patent disputes work. Why would people bring a class action suit?


Quote:
I don't know all the details about how a phone works, but it does. If my blackberry continues to work much like it does now, I don't care about the details. I just care that it works
I would assume that you are alone in this view. For the rest of the world, it does not suffice for stuff to work, it must work well. That is the concern with a workaround. Blackberry is the best out there. If they change the technology, is it a safe assumption that the functionality will be unchanged? That is why details would be useful. Clearly there are no details availible, so the whole thing remains pretty unknown. If the workaround does keep the technology at the current standard, then we are in good shape. However, i am not comfortable making those kind of broad assumptions before more information is released (as i assume will happen as this issue moves forward)

Last edited by 1RIM4sure : 12-06-2005 at 05:26 PM.
Offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 07:27 PM   #55 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Waterloo: Home of RIM
Model: PlayB
Carrier: Bell Mobility
Posts: 1,008
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1RIM4sure
I understand that there is nothing public about the workaround. Yet, you were able to get the details? Am i to assume that you work at RIM?

The fact that RIM says it exists doesn't mean much.

It can exist and hinder the quality of the current system - i am sure we would all agree that this is unacceptable. RIM's great push email is what makes it superior - changing the system could cause problems.

Or it could exist and still violate the patent. Therefore, it would be useless.

The only way a workaround matter is if it exists and does NOT hinder quality and is NOT in violation of NTP patents.
In order to determine whether these conditions are true, we would need to know more about the details.
The are other variables which you're not considering. Unfortunately I can't and won't discuss details beyond what I've already indicated.

However, IMO, the argument is moot. The "workaround" likely will never see the light of day. NTP has lost the last round of patent challenges, and this is an excellent incentive for them to settle with RIM.
Offline  
Old 12-07-2005, 08:34 AM   #56 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: None
Carrier: Verizon/Sprint
Posts: 299
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jase88
The are other variables which you're not considering. Unfortunately I can't and won't discuss details beyond what I've already indicated.

However, IMO, the argument is moot. The "workaround" likely will never see the light of day. NTP has lost the last round of patent challenges, and this is an excellent incentive for them to settle with RIM.

NTP hasn't lost anything. There are two different processes at work here, the legal proceedings and the patent review. Each has it's own appeal process. The fact that the patent officed intially rejected some of the patents doesn't have any bearing on the legal case, and the judge has stated as much.
Offline  
Old 12-07-2005, 08:56 AM   #57 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: 8700
Carrier: t-mobile
Posts: 125
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1RIM4sure
I think i sound more like somebody trying to understand the details rather than just mindlessly believing everything i hear or read in the news. You claimed you were familiar with the details, but it seems you meant that you only know one detail - it exists.
you have me confused with Jace88, but thats ok. I have more knowledge than just the "it exists" detail, but, much like Jace88, I have a limited amount I can say.

Quote:
I think you have misinterpreted the way these patent disputes work. Why would people bring a class action suit?
I'm sure some lawyer would try to sue Rim based on the fact they sold a product that they said would do X, but now it either doesn't work at all, or works differently, so people want their money back for their BB. I could see it happen.

Quote:
I would assume that you are alone in this view. For the rest of the world, it does not suffice for stuff to work, it must work well. That is the concern with a workaround.
I never said I didn't want it to work well. I want it to work like it does now, or with very limited changes. I think we all agree on that front
Offline  
Old 12-07-2005, 11:16 AM   #58 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Waterloo: Home of RIM
Model: PlayB
Carrier: Bell Mobility
Posts: 1,008
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_Guy
NTP hasn't lost anything. There are two different processes at work here, the legal proceedings and the patent review. Each has it's own appeal process. The fact that the patent officed intially rejected some of the patents doesn't have any bearing on the legal case, and the judge has stated as much.
It was in the news yesterday that the final patent was struck down by the patent office. Of course NTP can appeal--and I'm sure they will. But this development puts pressure on NTP to settle...which is what everyone (including NTP) wants to do anyway...
Offline  
Old 12-07-2005, 01:13 PM   #59 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: None
Carrier: Verizon/Sprint
Posts: 299
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jase88
It was in the news yesterday that the final patent was struck down by the patent office. Of course NTP can appeal--and I'm sure they will. But this development puts pressure on NTP to settle...which is what everyone (including NTP) wants to do anyway...
There is an appeals process for the patent office just like there is one for the courts. RIMM is not the only one that can drag this thing out. Preliminary decisions by the patent office have no bearing on this case as it was decided back when the patents were enforceable.

"In his ruling last week, Virginia Judge James R. Spencer said he couldn't wait for the belabored Patent Office process and would consider shutting down the BlackBerry service in the United States"

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10313612/site/newsweek/

All the pressure is on RIMM to settle, not NTP. RIMM is losing millions in legal fees ($6 million last quarter, if I remember correctly), this is public relations nightmare and they are going to see sales slow as people look for alternative solutions

All tha being said, I don't see BB service being shut down. Does no good for RIMM or NTP. The damage has already been done with news reports coming out of companies looking for alternatives. While they may not need to use these contingency plans, the fact that they seeing alternative solutions should be troubling to RIMM.

Last edited by Good_Guy : 12-07-2005 at 01:15 PM.
Offline  
Old 12-07-2005, 02:17 PM   #60 (permalink)
Retired BBF Moderator
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Model: Bold
Carrier: Rogers
Posts: 4,870
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_Guy
There is an appeals process for the patent office just like there is one for the courts. RIMM is not the only one that can drag this thing out. Preliminary decisions by the patent office have no bearing on this case as it was decided back when the patents were enforceable.

"In his ruling last week, Virginia Judge James R. Spencer said he couldn't wait for the belabored Patent Office process and would consider shutting down the BlackBerry service in the United States"

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10313612/site/newsweek/

All the pressure is on RIMM to settle, not NTP. RIMM is losing millions in legal fees ($6 million last quarter, if I remember correctly), this is public relations nightmare and they are going to see sales slow as people look for alternative solutions

All tha being said, I don't see BB service being shut down. Does no good for RIMM or NTP. The damage has already been done with news reports coming out of companies looking for alternatives. While they may not need to use these contingency plans, the fact that they seeing alternative solutions should be troubling to RIMM.
Excellent post.

As much as I hate to, I totally agree with this Good_Guy post here.
__________________
Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
Author of XMPP extension XEP-0301:
www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0301.html - specification
www.realjabber.org - open source
Offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





Copyright 2004-2014 BlackBerryForums.com.
The names RIM and BlackBerry are registered Trademarks of BlackBerry Inc.