BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-23-2006, 10:34 AM   #1 (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 Supreme Court rejects BlackBerry appeal

Please Login to Remove!

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.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 11:58 AM   #2 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Tylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Brighton, CO
Model: 8310
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 47
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
- Tylar
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 12:05 PM   #3 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Model: 7100T
Posts: 86
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

those other guys should have taken that 300 plus some million settlement while they had the chance...............too bad they got so greedy
__________________
PIN: 203A0340
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 12:08 PM   #4 (permalink)
Retired BBF Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Model: N/A
Carrier: N/A
Posts: 3,309
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

450mil to be exact but who's counting
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 12:17 PM   #5 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
blkberryboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dearborn, MI
Model: Repl.
Carrier: Cingular/ATT
Posts: 1,146
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by finch
450mil to be exact but who's counting
Those of us making considerebly less per year...
__________________
JASON
iTurned to the darkside.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 12:48 PM   #6 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Model: 8310v
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 95
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

man they're crazy for turning down 450mil
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 12:54 PM   #7 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
jbairdjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, Ne
Model: 9550
OS: 5.0
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 1,232
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
Blackberry Storm2 (Verizon)
7280-7780-7290-7100g-7250-8703-8830-8330-9530-9550
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 01:25 PM   #8 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
BES admin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NY
Model: Droid
Carrier: Android -> AT&T
Posts: 491
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by romerom
man they're crazy for turning down 450mil
I agree, and I think they are beginning to realize that they "maybe" made a mistake not taking the initial offer and moving on.

"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.
__________________
You had me at EHLO!
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:24 PM   #9 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Model: 7280
Posts: 27
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tylar
Multiple news agencies report that the Patent office is indicating rejection of the patents, thereby making all of this a waste of time.
I'm pretty sure that whatever the US Patent Office does, it will have no effect on NTP's court case against RIM. RIM's exhausted its appeal options and has already been found guilty of infringement. All that's left now is what the judge will decide to do.

Last edited by JamesR : 01-23-2006 at 02:40 PM.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:27 PM   #10 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Jersey
Model: 9630
Carrier: Sprint
Posts: 137
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesR
I'm pretty sure that whatever the US Patent Office does, it will have no effect on NTP's court case against RIM. RIM's exhausted its appeal options and has already been found guilty of infringement. All that's left now is what the judge will decide to do.
How can they be guilty of infringing upon patents that the Patent Office says do not exist?

Seems like it is now moot.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:32 PM   #11 (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 JamesR
I'm pretty sure that whatever the US Patent Office does, it will have no effect on NTP's court case against RIM.
I would completely disagree. If the patent office comes to a final decission that all the patents are INVALID before the judge forces any meaning negative action against RIM. If the Judge rules first, which is what NTP has been trying to push for, then it could matter, especially if it forced RIM to settle before the Patent office came to it's conclusion.
__________________
Mitch
8310 / New Beetle / 2006 Triumph Daytona 675 / Give Kids the World
Me @ GKTW on my D675
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:34 PM   #12 (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

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).
__________________
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 01-23-2006, 02:37 PM   #13 (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 nb_mitch
I would completely disagree. If the patent office comes to a final decission that all the patents are INVALID before the judge forces any meaning negative action against RIM. If the Judge rules first, which is what NTP has been trying to push for, then it could matter, especially if it forced RIM to settle before the Patent office came to it's conclusion.
The USPTO's final decision is years away not days/weeks. They are making non-final judgements right now, which leaves room for an NTP appeal within the patent office and then a legal appeal in the court system (which would likely be rejected almost immediately).
__________________
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 01-23-2006, 02:38 PM   #14 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
NCBuckeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Model: Bold
PIN: 4.6
Carrier: AT&T
Posts: 853
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

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.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:40 PM   #15 (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

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.
__________________
Mitch
8310 / New Beetle / 2006 Triumph Daytona 675 / Give Kids the World
Me @ GKTW on my D675
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:42 PM   #16 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Model: 8700
Carrier: tmobile
Posts: 55
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I thought the 450mil was rejected by the JUDGE, not NTP
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 02:55 PM   #17 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
BBFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Waukegan, IL
Model: 9000
OS: 4.6.0.167
PIN: If you knew me you would have it!
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 679
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

We still have a long time before any final judgments will be decided imo.
__________________
Blackberry Veteran
"Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday."

Looking to buy or sale used car audio?
www.caraudioclassifieds.org
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 03:09 PM   #18 (permalink)
Knows Where the Search Button Is
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Model: 7280
Posts: 27
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikegold
How can they be guilty of infringing upon patents that the Patent Office says do not exist?

Seems like it is now moot.
From http://www.eetuk.com/bus/news/showAr...leID=177102817 and other places:

Quote:
RIM has asked U.S. Judge James Spencer to delay his injunction until the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) rules on the validity of the patents. But Judge Spencer has said in the past that PTO rulings have no bearing on his court's infringement rulings.
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.

Last edited by JamesR : 01-23-2006 at 03:14 PM.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:07 PM   #19 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Model: 7750
Posts: 8
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philhu
I thought the 450mil was rejected by the JUDGE, not NTP
You are correct. Many people on this board are very poorly informed on this topic.
Offline  
Old 01-23-2006, 04:53 PM   #20 (permalink)
CrackBerry Addict
 
dkmadrid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Pueblo, CO
Model: 9530
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 712
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
Now you can call me STORMin' Norman, except my name isn't Norman.
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.