BlackBerry Forums Support Community

BlackBerry Forums Support Community (http://www.blackberryforums.com/)
-   RIM Stock/Legal Discussion (http://www.blackberryforums.com/rim-stock-legal-discussion/)
-   -   BlackBerry Contingency Plans -- NTP Issue. (http://www.blackberryforums.com/rim-stock-legal-discussion/20384-blackberry-contingency-plans-ntp-issue.html)

bbgirl 02-23-2006 03:13 PM

http://www.gcn.com/vol1_no1/mobile-w...obile-wireless


THE PLOT THICKENS.....


OH MY...even though, we as bes geeks knew this. How in the hell did the Justice department, think this could happen?

bbgirl 02-23-2006 03:16 PM

Okay, this one is for laughs...NTP will stop at nothing....


http://www.gcn.com/vol1_no1/daily-updates/38052-1.html

sailorlena 02-23-2006 04:53 PM

Found the answer to US BES and Exchange server whether users outside of US is impacted. The answer is NO. It's on page 2 of the RIM overview.
http://www.blackberry.com/select/mme...e_overview.pdf

jarthurs 02-24-2006 10:01 AM

It won't impact users outside of the US unless you travel to the US. You'll have to load the workaround if you go to the US at all.

jarthurs 02-24-2006 01:32 PM

Patent Office rejected final NTP patent!

RegisteredUser 02-24-2006 02:47 PM

Should the Patent Re-Examination prove to be the final say, then RIM should admit their fault and just pay up the damage in stealing someone else's idea. This goes to plagerism and other users who use the products illegally for business.

BBAdmin 02-24-2006 02:52 PM

Multi-mode edition is purely a patch to be installed on the device. It effects the way a device connects to the NOC when in the US (be it a US based, or US roamed user). The user will see nothing different on the device and will not have to do anything if roaming.

ebgreen 02-24-2006 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RegisteredUser
Should the Patent Re-Examination prove to be the final say, then RIM should admit their fault and just pay up the damage in stealing someone else's idea. This goes to plagerism and other users who use the products illegally for business.


Huh? The Patent Office has repeatedly said that RIM is not at fault.

hi13579 02-25-2006 02:46 AM

Yeah, the patents are rejected, but the judge won't consider it at all since the decision can be appealed. NTP is just a patent troll trying to get a huge pay day. RIM wanted to settle this last year, but the deal fell short. why? is it because NTP too greedy? and since when has NTP ever thought about people like us? BlackBerrys are so popular not because of the patents, but because a company like RIM took their time and effort to develop and implement a system that truely brings benefits to people. Companies like NTP have no intention of ever implementing their ideas. What good does it do? Money isn't everything in this world you know. Surely patent infringement is wrong, but is it so wrong to the point that a $450 million dollar settlement seems unreasonable? remember, RIM wanted to settle this all along, and RIM did not steal the ideas from NTP or else they would've acquired the patents from NTP a long time ago, way before anybody even knows what a BlackBerry is. This whole lawsuit thing only benefits NTP. Even if RIM wins, they still lose a lot of time, effort, and money on this whole patent infringement case. If NTP wins, they get a huge sum of money and passing the cost onto people like us. we either get our service interrupted or stopped in the worst case. There are a lot of people who rely on BlackBerrys to provide essential services. Services like hospitals, fire departments, police, etc have direct impact on people's lives. i wonder how guys at NTP would feel if a blackberry service interruption end up costing lives.. (not saying it'll happen) I personally don't think building one's happiness upon others' pain is morally right, especailly when 3 million users are involved.

sil40 02-26-2006 03:31 PM

*Attempt at light-hearted humor*

We just need to petition Microsoft to step in and buy NTP and RIM. End of arguments, although we would then have to pay more for BB 'cleint access licenses', and the only chat client that would be left would be MSN =)

-Brad

schizm 02-27-2006 08:10 AM

NTP is dead in the water - just a matter of time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RegisteredUser
Should the Patent Re-Examination prove to be the final say, then RIM should admit their fault and just pay up the damage in stealing someone else's idea. This goes to plagerism and other users who use the products illegally for business.

according to the patent office, the only plagerism here is with NTP. With the judge refusing to shutdown RIM on Friday, I can see this dragging on for another year if NTP and RIM do not settle. If the judge is smart, he will wait till the patent office issues its final decision on the re-examination.

pjdyer214 03-01-2006 03:45 PM

Here is an interesting hypothetical timeline from a blog on ZDNet of what is thought to happen with the RIM workaround and what the workaround will do to drag out the injunction hearing.

There are a few reasons why it won't unfold exactly as follows. The blog forgets to mention impacts/delays caused by the pending patent appeals and perception that RIM doesn't want to settle. The blog predicts the "multi-mode" workaround would be activated later in March as a voluntary backup and goes on to predict a settlement would occur April 14th. Needless to say..it will be interesting to see if parts of the prediction end up happening and when...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=935

ebgreen 03-01-2006 04:30 PM

My main quibble with that timeline is that various outside companies have looked at the workaround (including Gartner) and seem to think that it would avoid any future patent infringement claims from NTP. So I don't see why the judge would grant an injunction against the workaround.

hf1khal 03-01-2006 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebgreen
My main quibble with that timeline is that various outside companies have looked at the workaround (including Gartner) and seem to think that it would avoid any future patent infringement claims from NTP. So I don't see why the judge would grant an injunction against the workaround.

I do agree. I do not think the judge can amke a determination against the work around without getting official non-partisan help which in my oprinion would take a lot longer than what is predicted on the blog.

Omar_Sharif 03-03-2006 05:49 PM

Agreement Signed
 
http://www.rim.com/news/press/2006/p..._2006-01.shtml

Omar_Sharif 03-03-2006 05:50 PM

rim.com/news/press/2006/pr-03_03_2006-01.shtml


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.