![]() |
Supreme Court rejects BlackBerry appeal I am no legal expert, but I think this only means that the Supreme Court will not change the lower court;s current position. But, I believe the lower court will end up taking into account the stated intention of the US Patnet Office to reject NTP's patents. So, my personal opinion is that this ruling does make too much difference. Thoughts? http://news.com.com/Supreme+Court+re...3-6029671.html Supreme Court rejects BlackBerry appeal By Reuters Story last modified Mon Jan 23 07:09:00 PST 2006 The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned down a request to review a major patent infringement ruling against the maker of the BlackBerry e-mail device. The high court rejected a petition by Research In Motion to review a federal appeals court ruling that could lead to a shutdown of most U.S. BlackBerry sales and service. On Oct. 26, Chief Justice John Roberts turned down an earlier request by RIM to stay the lower court's patent infringement ruling while the high court decides whether to hear a RIM appeal. More details to follow. Story Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Copyright ©1995-2006 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. |
Agreed. Multiple news agencies report that the Patent office is indicating rejection of the patents, thereby making all of this a waste of time. We'll see what develops, but i'm stil pretty encouraged by the fact that mutliple news agencies on multiple continents have the same report about the US Patent Office. I'll cross my thumbs in the meantime. :razz: |
those other guys should have taken that 300 plus some million settlement while they had the chance...............too bad they got so greedy |
450mil to be exact but who's counting ;-) |
Quote:
|
man they're crazy for turning down 450mil |
I hope this case will cause a massive overhaul of the patent system. There are too many companies who make nothing trying to use patents to extort legitimate businesses. |
Quote:
"In a court filing last week, NTP said it was willing to resolve the matter if RIM were to pay it the original 5.7 percent royalty fee." Sounds to me like NTP is gonna be up Sh*t creek without a paddle after this is done with. For one, Im glad. I am not in favor of software patents in general, but paper holders, "squatters," are the least desireable in the entire process if you ask me. IMO. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Seems like it is now moot. |
Quote:
|
We honestly have to look at this through their eyes rather than those being affected. To be fair, the former co-founder NTP (he died last summer) actually did design and patent a system of email delivery to wireless devices for AT&T years and years ago. He never had an actual product - just contractual work that was a bit ahead of its time (sort of) that never materialized into a working system (to my knowledge). With that said, I think that such a patent would hopefully not be granted in our 'overhauled' patenting system in modern times. Sometimes patents will just run their course, and other times, I think its our patent office's and justice system's obligation to null and void these kind of broad-idea patents (for example, your DNA strands are patented). I don't think that Judge Spencer is going to rule in favor of RIM, though. He wants the case to be over and done with - he has stated as much (which is very unprofessional to the whole balanced argument about the judicial system). He has stated that he's not going to base his decision on the patent office, just as he doesn't expect them to base their decisions on his ruling. If the courts rule against RIM, but the patent office later rules against the patents, then I'm not sure what will happen - but I will ask for Spencer's resignation, as these cases should not be decided on outdated evidence if new findings are made during the appeals process (my opinion). |
Quote:
|
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. |
It has been going on for 4 years already, what's a few more, afterall one party died last year, it isn't like it is going to matter to him if it is ever decided. |
I thought the 450mil was rejected by the JUDGE, not NTP |
We still have a long time before any final judgments will be decided imo. |
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
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. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:49 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.