BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-23-2006, 04:03 PM   #21 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
Model: 8703
Carrier: verizon
Posts: 55
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Please Login to Remove!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzio fucetola
You are correct. Many people on this board are very poorly informed on this topic.
I'm not totally informed, but I do remember reading that the Judge was the one who rejected the settlement.. because of NTP. Most courts want out of court settlements; for almost any litigation, including divorce. NTP, I believe, was asking for $1 billion, plus 5.7 percent of future sales (royalties). RIM offered 450mil, plus NO royalties. NTP was going to reject it anyway, but the Judge did it for them..saying the settlement was not fair.

For those that claim NTP should have taken the 450mil are only basing this on emotion and some mis-information. Considering that RIM is making multi-billion digits off of the technology, via its hardware... why would anyone accept a fraction of that as payment in full? Hindsight, if they (NTP) lose the case (which is unlikely because technically they already won), then, in hindsight, they should have taken the 450mil, until then, $1 billion plu 5-6% royalties seems like a fair settlement.. and I think the Judge agrees.

Last edited by auser : 01-23-2006 at 04:05 PM. Reason: typos
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:07 PM   #22 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
Model: 8703
Carrier: verizon
Posts: 55
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkmadrid
Bottom line to me is, will I have to become a TREO customer so I can keep getting my damn email! I keep hearing people saying that RIMM has a work around already in the works waiting, etc, etc, but i don't hear anything like that through any news media sources I read.
True. That's the bottom line for me as well. Also, if RIM has a work-around, WHY NOT JUST START USING THE WORK-AROUND NOW, AND BE DONE WITH THE ENTIRE MATTER? Seems to me this so-called work around must not be very good or they'd use it now...
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:12 PM   #23 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
klp45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Model: 8700g
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 25
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

It just doesn't seem right that a judge can award damages when the validity of the patent(s) is still in question. I always thought that you had to prove infringement to be awarded damages. Hopefully it will come to an end in 2006.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:13 PM   #24 (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 ponzio fucetola
You are correct. Many people on this board are very poorly informed on this topic.
Actually, you are incorrect, both of you

A settlement of $450M was reached, I believe last April timeframe. Then NTP in June claimed that there was no final settlement and it all fell apart (with everyones assumption the dead guy wanted more money, $1B has been thrown around allot. The Judge agreed with NTP a few months ago and then the US government waded in and the Patent Office put everything on the fast track. Originally I though the Judge was going to make a ruling back in November, but it is now almost Feb and nothing from his side, but the Patent Office as been busy.
__________________
Mitch
8310 / New Beetle / 2006 Triumph Daytona 675 / Give Kids the World
Me @ GKTW on my D675
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:15 PM   #25 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Model: 8700C
Posts: 42
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default I agree

Quote:
Originally Posted by auser
True. That's the bottom line for me as well. Also, if RIM has a work-around, WHY NOT JUST START USING THE WORK-AROUND NOW, AND BE DONE WITH THE ENTIRE MATTER? Seems to me this so-called work around must not be very good or they'd use it now...
I have read some conjecture about what the workaround supposedly is going to do. If they were correct (a big if), then it would no longer be push email. The user would have to initiate a call to the server to get their mail. Sounds like it might be correct. I agree with the above comment, though. If the workaround were really good - RIM would implement now. They must feel it is inferior to have even offered the $450M - let alone anything more.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:17 PM   #26 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
Model: 8703
Carrier: verizon
Posts: 55
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by klp45
It just doesn't seem right that a judge can award damages when the validity of the patent(s) is still in question. I always thought that you had to prove infringement to be awarded damages. Hopefully it will come to an end in 2006.
True. But the case had already been decided, based on the current Patents. They are in the phase where the judge is suppose to levy an injunction or decision as to the penalties. For all that matters to the judge right now is that NTP already won the law suit, and what shoul dbe the damages. If later the PTO office says the patent is invlalid, I suppose RIM would have to sue to recoup damages? Does this make sense or am I totally missing the point?
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:23 PM   #27 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
klp45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Model: 8700g
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 25
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by auser
True. But the case had already been decided, based on the current Patents. They are in the phase where the judge is suppose to levy an injunction or decision as to the penalties. For all that matters to the judge right now is that NTP already won the law suit, and what shoul dbe the damages. If later the PTO office says the patent is invlalid, I suppose RIM would have to sue to recoup damages? Does this make sense or am I totally missing the point?


I got it, Thanks.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:51 PM   #28 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
Model: 8703
Carrier: verizon
Posts: 55
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nb_mitch
Actually, you are incorrect, both of you

A settlement of $450M was reached, I believe last April timeframe. Then NTP in June claimed that there was no final settlement and it all fell apart (with everyones assumption the dead guy wanted more money, $1B has been thrown around allot. The Judge agreed with NTP a few months ago and then the US government waded in and the Patent Office put everything on the fast track. Originally I though the Judge was going to make a ruling back in November, but it is now almost Feb and nothing from his side, but the Patent Office as been busy.
If we are incorrect, its due to incorrect news reporting.. see below article...

November 30, 2005
By Declan McCullagh, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: November 30, 2005, 8:40 AM PT

In a second order released Wednesday, the judge also rejected a $450 million settlement reached earlier in the year between RIM and NTP--a small patent-holding company in Arlington, Va., that filed the lawsuit--saying it was not "valid and enforceable."
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:54 PM   #29 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: AZ
Model: 9900
Carrier: ATT
Posts: 1,110
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Default

It is becoming crazy by now.. Now I am sure NTP is thinking of getting that money and go cruising but since Intel is also joining the forces with RIM on Patents, NTP might have hard time to drag the case outside its limits..

To be on safe side I think I will be fine for a while because Phoenix,AZ has put the wirless network so it will be ok to have lapop in the vehicle which can have access to net.. I will survive without BB for a while and I will fee line I am in other country and can get to it.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 07:00 PM   #30 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Model: 8320
PIN: 242a22a7
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 408
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCBuckeye
My two cents....pay the settlement and go on with buisness. They have to look at right now they have been found "guilty", would you rather be shut down and lose all that money now and in the future or pay now and go on??? I think I would pay the fine and say see you later and put it behind you.

My sentiments exactly. It's not like RIM is losing customers. As a matter of fact, they added on over a half million customers just last quarter. That's in the midst of all of this chaos. Imagine how many they would've added otherwise!! This is just my opinion on the matter.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 07:56 PM   #31 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
whsbuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SE PA.
Model: 9800
OS: 4.6.0.304
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 2,791
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I wonder what the carriers (VZW, Cingular, T-MO) will do when/if our BBs are turned off for push email? Will they rebate us some amount of the data we would use? It could be a real mess all across the board. Maybe we can class-action NTP for our damages!
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 08:53 PM   #32 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Model: 8320
PIN: 242a22a7
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 408
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whsbuss
I wonder what the carriers (VZW, Cingular, T-MO) will do when/if our BBs are turned off for push email? Will they rebate us some amount of the data we would use? It could be a real mess all across the board. Maybe we can class-action NTP for our damages!

They would have no option but to offer a credit for the BB data plan and/or offer you a different device, such as one of the Windows Mobile Smartphones "if" it should come right down to that.

That's a "if"--not saying that's what will happen or even be offered.

"If" RIM got shut down in the US, everyone would lose as I see it.
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 01:26 AM   #33 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Model: Tour
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 730
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I think that the original jury that sided with NTP is to fault for all of this. They had a case of "Oh feel sorry for the little guy that sqautted till the big bad corporation came around" and came running with his patents. I think it's crap and in this day and age EVERYTHING in replicated in so many forms with so many differnt names. NTP just wants money, pay them 2 billion + lawyer fees, take all their patents make them sign a docuement stating they'll never sue again and end the whole damn thing.
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 12:44 PM   #34 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Model: 8320
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 70
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Here is some clarification regarding the $450 million.

Licensing deal signed March 16, 2005:
http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA523502.html
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0317029634.htm

The deal fell apart and RIM asked the court to uphold the agreement.
http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA607450.html

The court ruled that the agreement was unenforceable.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/30/r...ruled-invalid/

A good overview from June: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5765510.html?tag=nl

And Forbes take on it from November
http://www.forbes.com/technology/per..._1130rimm.html

One side bit of info... for patent licenseing, average licensing of patent portfolios (not just single patents) is in the neighborhood of ~0.5%. NTP is asking for more than ten times that ammount. Good and Visto both licensed the patents from NTP. I don't know the total costs for their agreements, but I do know that stock was given as well. (Do your own searches for their agreements)

Also, RIM does keep all of their press releases including those on the NTP case. http://www.rim.com/news/press/index.shtml

Jester
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 12:50 PM   #35 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
KonTiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NJ, USA
Model: 9650
OS: 6.0.0.524
PIN: 007
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 2,762
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I wish in the first place that people refrain from starting new threads on this topic, one there really is no need, two its like beating a dead horse with a stick, it aint going no place. three, it doesnt really matter, it is not up to us, it is not in our hands. When the ruling comes down one of three things are going to happen, either it will be settled and its over, it wont be settle and RIM (who is not going to go under no matter what) will implement the work around, or three everything fails and we are all screwed. In any event as i stated before, there is nothing you can do about the whole issue, so nobody should be that concerned as to warrant all these threads. Enough already. I move that this thread should also be closed.
__________________
BB Tour 9650


Running OS 6.0.0.524
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 03:19 PM   #36 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Model: 7350
Posts: 1
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

After looking at the central patent in question (#5,436,960), specifically the technical diagrams, It would look like the patent covers several other technologies that are now becoming very popular, specifically wireless SOHO networks, that make use of RF wireless routers, use standard email systems that connect to a central distribution 'gateway' owned by the ISP or provider, and require a 'push' or timed 'pull' type of technology to move emails from the central servers that recieve the emails to the external desktops, connected to the central station via a wireless network. These standard email programs, when combined with a wireless network appear to create a system is described in the patent.
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 04:00 PM   #37 (permalink)
BlackBerry God
 
jibi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Jibi's Secret Place
Model: 8900
OS: 4.6.1.174
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 11,310
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesR
The Patent Office's decision to invalidate a patent doesn't erase the fact that the patent existed. The patent proves that NTP created the technology and created it before RIM used it in the BB.

That's all that matters to the court. The decision of whether or not the technology can be considered NTP's intellectual property and not prior art is ultimately up to the court. After all, the patent office is not a legal court - it's just a committee. A company that registers a patent doesn't automatically have a legal right to that technology. The patent just acts like a receipt that proves the company came up with that specific technology at a certain date. It's up to the court to decide whether or not the patent is enforceable. And unfortunately in this case, the court and several appellate courts have decided that NTP's patents are enforceable and that RIM is infringing.
Not true. The patents currently exist and are still valid for all applicable purposes. The court case has been dragging on for years and the judge has grown tired of the case. The USPTO review of the patents has no part in his case because he intends to move forward with his decisions based on CURRENT finalizations from the patent office concerning the patents.

Of course, the ideal thing for him to do would be to wait on the USPTO review, but that's not necessarily what's going to happen.
__________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move.
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 05:16 PM   #38 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Deering, NH
Model: 8703e
Carrier: verizon
Posts: 193
Post Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

yeah, we can create a class action which means we get a 15% rebate on future RIM devices (which will still infringe the paptent), so it means we can buy another device that won't work, and the lawyers will get millions.

Not a workable idea. Besides, a few weeks/months without e-mail (while everyone cools down and agrees to a settlement) can't be all that bad, can it? (of corse I'll get withdrawal symptoms like the rest of you!).
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 07:06 PM   #39 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
whsbuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SE PA.
Model: 9800
OS: 4.6.0.304
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 2,791
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codyman
yeah, we can create a class action which means we get a 15% rebate on future RIM devices (which will still infringe the paptent), so it means we can buy another device that won't work, and the lawyers will get millions.

Not a workable idea. Besides, a few weeks/months without e-mail (while everyone cools down and agrees to a settlement) can't be all that bad, can it? (of corse I'll get withdrawal symptoms like the rest of you!).
Well my business will be severely impacted without instant emails.
Offline  
Old 01-24-2006, 07:44 PM   #40 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
DaddyRick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Orlando
Model: 7290
Posts: 30
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by auser
True. That's the bottom line for me as well. Also, if RIM has a work-around, WHY NOT JUST START USING THE WORK-AROUND NOW, AND BE DONE WITH THE ENTIRE MATTER? Seems to me this so-called work around must not be very good or they'd use it now...
I agree with you and dkmadrid. Will I have to go back to my Palm Treo 650. At least I put it back in its original box instead of selling it on ebay.

And I agree with what jibi said above as well. Hopefully I wont have to take my Treo out of the box.
__________________
DaddyRick
201DDAD6
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.