BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-27-2006, 12:40 PM   #41 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Kablooey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Maryland
Model: 9800
PIN: 25ee2d53
Carrier: AT&T and Verizon 9650
Posts: 132
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Please Login to Remove!

I am a huge fan of RIM's system and it has become my chosen career path to support it, but I must admit that I have to agree with one of the things that Carterofmars said and that is that RIM is probably going to lose in this round of the fight! The judge seems to have a very narrow focus in this matter and he is completely focused on the previous jury verdict that he presided over 3 years ago. I believe his decision will not be favorable to RIM because of several factors- First he refused to hear the DOJ request to postpone any injunction, second, his comments to the lawyers and particularly to the RIM lawyers were that they should have reached a business agreement instead of making him give a legal decision, third, although the Patent office has rejected the infringement claims, even if he wanted to, the judge could not make any quantitative decision based on this until NTP exhausts their appeals, finally, the judge made repeated references to the fact that he is there to assess damages based on the previous jury verdict and at this point, which RIM lost.

I just hope the decision is swift and not crippeling to RIM.

It's silly, when you stop and think, that a company that makes no revenue from RIM if it is shutdown(see bankruptcy laws), and a company that has a lion's share of a multi-billion dollar industry can't come to some sort of an equitable decision so that we can all just move on with our lives!
Offline  
Old 02-28-2006, 09:23 AM   #42 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Model: 9000
Carrier: Rogers
Posts: 86
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

The judge is narrowly focused because that's the issue he has to decide on. He cannot re-try the case.
Offline  
Old 02-28-2006, 04:46 PM   #43 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Model: Torch
Carrier: ATT
Posts: 179
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Kinda makes me wonder about the IT security of a company that would let it's users use a Treo 700w without MSFP. You'd be willing to let company information reside on a device without the ability to enforce password usage on it?
Offline  
Old 02-28-2006, 08:37 PM   #44 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West of Ottawa, Canada
Model: PassP
OS: 10
Carrier: Bell
Posts: 1,069
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carterofmars
Thanks Doofus... sorry there goes my spelling again.

But seriously, this forum is entitled "RIM Stock/Legal Discussion" and that's why I am using the ticker name...

But back to the post subject...RIMM kinda painted itself into a corner here.
My my . . we're a bit testy today . . . did you check your thong to see if it wasn't on back to front!
Offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 06:09 AM   #45 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Model: 7100T
Posts: 6
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

thanks for the site, i will check it out.
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.