BlackBerry Forums Support Community

BlackBerry Forums Support Community (http://www.blackberryforums.com/)
-   RIM Stock/Legal Discussion (http://www.blackberryforums.com/rim-stock-legal-discussion/)
-   -   Judge stops short of BlackBerry cutoff (http://www.blackberryforums.com/rim-stock-legal-discussion/27138-judge-stops-short-blackberry-cutoff.html)

dozment 02-24-2006 01:02 PM

Judge stops short of BlackBerry cutoff
 
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...-RIM-JUDGE.xml





Judge stops short of BlackBerry cutoff
Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:54 PM ET

RICHMOND, Virginia (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Friday stopped short of ordering an immediate shutdown of millions of BlackBerry portable e-mail devices made by Research In Motion Ltd..

But U.S. District Judge James Spencer said there was no escaping that RIM had been found to be infringing on NTP Inc.'s patents and he would issue a decision on an injunction "as soon as reasonably possible."

NJBlackBerry 02-24-2006 01:03 PM

Basically - he did nothing! Let the back office negotiations continue. Works fine for me.

lgreenberg 02-24-2006 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry
Basically - he did nothing! Let the back office negotiations continue. Works fine for me.

Yeah exactly.

But in a way it bothers me that we'll have to continue to wait. I'd just like to hear a defintive answer one way or the other. This waiting nonsense is for the birds.

apple85 02-24-2006 01:40 PM

Yeah
 
Yeah I agree he did nothing but I also think maybe he's starting to feel some pressure from the federal government and millions of users! Let RIM and NTP continue to talk and if they don't work it out, he won't issue an injunction but instead for RIM to pay a certain amount of money? Possibly not as much as NTP wants but... Thats just my theory

jarthurs 02-24-2006 01:42 PM

Too bad the judges statements are incorrect in the CBC.ca article about how RIM "clearly infringed on NTP patents". The Patent Office finally rejected the last claim.

klp45 02-24-2006 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jarthurs
Too bad the judges statements are incorrect in the CBC.ca article about how RIM "clearly infringed on NTP patents". The Patent Office finally rejected the last claim.

Yeah, the patent office rejected the last one. So all of NTP claims have been rejected via the patent office. The judge may have also been waiting to see the final ruling - so as to make Rim's payout comeserate. I was suprised about the 2 million man hours to implement the workaround. It looks like Rim is going to come away looking sweaky clean - just my opinion.

BlackBerry Master 02-24-2006 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by klp45
Yeah, the patent office rejected the last one. So all of NTP claims have been rejected via the patent office. The judge may have also been waiting to see the final ruling - so as to make Rim's payout comeserate. I was suprised about the 2 million man hours to implement the workaround. It looks like Rim is going to come away looking sweaky clean - just my opinion.

Yes. Hopefully we will. All the patens have now been rejected. Just waiting for the ruling.

madmarvcr 02-24-2006 03:35 PM

NTP and RIM are going to be playing "Deal or No Deal"

NTP, the banker is calling...LOL

ecornwell 02-24-2006 03:35 PM

I don't want to burst anyoneís bubble but somewhere I read that patent law is different than criminal law. Basically in criminal law if you find something that can prove your case at any time, it is admitted. In patent law, they have already been convicted of patent infringement so now they will be sentenced. I think thatís the way it works so it doesnít matter that patents have been invalidated because they were already guilty. It sounds pretty stupid if you ask me.

*Note: Iím no lawyer, thatís just the way someone described it to me. If this is not correct, feel free to correct me.

rcg 02-24-2006 03:37 PM

I would have prefered an answer today as well.

BBDummy 02-24-2006 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ecornwell
I don't want to burst anyoneís bubble but somewhere I read that patent law is different than criminal law. Basically in criminal law if you find something that can prove your case at any time, it is admitted. In patent law, they have already been convicted of patent infringement so now they will be sentenced. I think thatís the way it works so it doesnít matter that patents have been invalidated because they were already guilty. It sounds pretty stupid if you ask me.

*Note: Iím no lawyer, thatís just the way someone described it to me. If this is not correct, feel free to correct me.

Something like that. RIM infringed a valid patent (actually, several valid patents), and now they will pay for it no matter what happens in the PTO. Something like an 8% royalty for all the PAST infringing behavior. The argument about the injunction is the argument about FUTURE infringing behavior, and the Deal or No Deal analogy made above is a good one. The closer we get to an injunction, the higher the settlement value goes; the closer we get to final action from the PTO (which could potentially cut off all future infringments), the lower the settlement value goes.

The point that seems to be misunderstood is that the PTO isn't saying that the patent never existed. The result of the reexam will be a new scope of protection (most likely, zero scope) that will become effective the day the reexam issues from the PTO. Thus, as I said above, regardless of what happens, RIM is not getting away scot-free.

Carterofmars 02-26-2006 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dozment
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...-RIM-JUDGE.xml





Judge stops short of BlackBerry cutoff
Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:54 PM ET

RICHMOND, Virginia (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Friday stopped short of ordering an immediate shutdown of millions of BlackBerry portable e-mail devices made by Research In Motion Ltd..

But U.S. District Judge James Spencer said there was no escaping that RIM had been found to be infringing on NTP Inc.'s patents and he would issue a decision on an injunction "as soon as reasonably possible."


dozment your right on the money! It amazes me how many people failed to understand the message the judge was trying to send to the RIMM attorneys... if they don't settle this he WILL force the injunction.

NJBlackBerry 02-26-2006 05:10 PM

Wow - a mind reader.

If that was the case, why didn't he grant the injunction with a 30 day grace period (which many thought he would do) to REALLY force RIMMMMs hands.

Or MAYBE he is waiting for all the Patents to be rejected by the Patent Office before deciding to NOT grant the injunction.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.