RIMM is in TROUBLE!
If the Judge was going to rule in favor of RIMM he would have FRIDAY PEOPLE! Think about it... that would be the easy and less controversial and ground shaking thing to do, if he was leaning that way he would have ruled that way instantly. The fact that he said the things he did to the RIMM attorney's, and gave RIMM maybe another week, shows that he's going to force the injunction, possible partial injunction, but an injunction none the less. And it will HURT RIMMs stock price. I'm in IT for an extremely large company; third largest on earth in our industry (100,000 + employees) and we are ready to switch to another PDA sollution with-in a couple of weeks! Now that's a fact. And if we're ready to pull the trigger on BB I know others are ready too. RIMM put itself in a lose lose possition at this point.
Also note this.... http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...224_237362.htm
Another large provider ready to dump BB.
There it goes.
The sky is falling. The sky is falling. :razz:
It's "RIM," not "RIMM." "RIMM" is the stock market abreviation!
Thanks Doofus... sorry there goes my spelling again. :smile:
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.
Not to be picky but that RIMM thiing has been annoying me as well but mama always said.. can't say something nice, don't say nuthin at all...
Yes, RIMMM painted itself into a corner.
Unless, of course, they win..
or they settle, which is probably what i'd think the judge would be trying to encourage.
okay, so final rejections of most of the claims have already been issued by the patent office, with the last of the patents expecting rejection in the next few weeks. there are no grounds for an injunction, although there would be grounds for past infringement penalties due to NTP. a settlement will be met within a week of any sort of injunction, in all honesty - and for a whole lot less than $450m. seriously, the sky is not falling. is rolling out a new solution really more cost-effective than rolling out RIM's workaround or, at the very least, waiting until everything plays out in court? i can understand the needs for having an in-house contingency plan, which i'm sure most companies have by now, but throwing your arms up and stating that hell has now taken over is ridiculous. if you're wanting to worry about a case, then worry about the Visto-RIM case that will be bound to be filed at some point here soon enough, and pray that RIM settles early.
Just to note, there are people in this thread who are involved with the wireless technology decisions being made for their companies, as well. Atleast two people who have replied are part of multi-billion dollar corporations, such as the case with the company your employed by (although I'm not sure of your position at the company). There are very little to no concerns from any of us, although I believe all of us have some sort of contingency planning if the worst-case scenarios play out and there is a complete BlackBerry blackout - although that has now been given less than a 1% chance by industry and non-industry experts.
But what if they win and then win some more NJ?
Well, if they win and win some more then I REALLY wish I had bought a lot of their stock at $10 three years ago ;-)
So what will your company go with then?
Also what will others go with if the berry is shut down?
Ok now that aside, this post from Carterofmars, reminds me of the story of Chicken Little, and to a lesser extend The Boy That Cried Wolf. Pessimism is a part of life so is Optimism, the Ying and the Yang, for every action there is a reaction, however nothing is gained from trying to incite people, to sensationalize what is happening. I am glad that he has prepared, I am glad that he has options available and contingency plans in place, Bravo, well done. Now lets drop this whole inane line of thinking and just wait patiently. I am sure that everyone involved with the possible exception of NTP's case is hoping and keeing everyone's best interest in mind. Even NTP will get their due, deservedly or not. My .02s worth, and I realize fully well that in the grand scheme of things that will not get any of us any closer to Nirvana.
Thanks for the go to hell comment... wow, unreal. I wanted to post this article about the little guy who had the idea. Other companies signed licensing agreements with NTP for the same technology, RIM hasn't because RIM is a bunch of thieves. Lets not forget the small inventor... the one who really creates; put quite simply, RIM swiped the idea.
Blurry on BlackBerry
Feb. 19--Chicago-area inventor Thomas Campana Jr. fashioned a wireless e-mail system years before the word "blackberry" came to mean more than just fruit.
His invention showed promise but was crude compared with the BlackBerry, the little device that built the mobile e-mail market. And Campana, who died two years ago of cancer, never logged a sale.
Yet today Campana's invention is at the heart of an epic legal battle that threatens to shut down much of the U.S. BlackBerry system, which has more than 3 million users.
Campana, who lived in Orland Park, patented a messaging system in the 1990s. His patents are the primary assets of NTP Inc., courtroom foe of BlackBerry's creator, Canada-based Research In Motion Ltd. (RIM).
NTP, which Campana formed with veteran patent lawyer Donald Stout, sued RIM for patent infringement in 2001. In 2002, a jury agreed, although recently the U.S Patent Office has back-pedaled on the validity of Campana's patents.
If NTP weathers the legal appeals process and ultimately prevails in its fight with RIM, Campana's widow and Arlington, Va.-based Stout could reap hundreds of millions of dollars.
The case has been closely watched largely because NTP is trying to get a court-ordered shutdown of the BlackBerry e-mail system; a critical hearing on the issue is slated for Friday.
The case has also put a spotlight on the surge in patent litigation and the rise of so-called "patent trolls." Trolls are companies that have no products but do have patents, sometimes very broad patents that critics say should never have been granted.
They make money by licensing their patents or by suing those who refuse such licensing agreements. Some patent analysts say they look sort of like NTP, which has no employees and no office.
"I lump the NTP/BlackBerry case into a bigger issue," said Jason Schultz, a staff attorney with the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation, which researches public interest issues on patents.
"Is all this litigation good for the U.S. economy, technology and the public? The only benefit is that they [NTP and companies like it] get to extract money. What have they done for the world?"
That seems to be RIM's thinking on the issue.
"Unlike NTP, RIM actually created something--a company and a new market segment through over 20 years of innovation, risk-taking, partnering, customer service, growth and re-investment," RIM's Chief Executive Jim Balsillie wrote in a December opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal.
Campana supporters see it differently, scoffing at the "troll" notion.
"Why should an entrepreneur not be able to protect his property," said Stout, a partner in law firm Antonelli, Terry, Stout & Kraus. Or as Campana's dad, Thomas Sr., put it, "If you're not going to protect patents, what is the use of having them?"
One matter is certain: While patent lawsuits have risen in tandem with a surge in patent grants over the past decade, intellectual property has always been a litigious terrain.
"If you're going to get into the patent game, you better be ready for litigation," said James Conley, a professor of technological innovation and industrial engineering management at Northwestern University.
History is full of inventors--famous ones, too--who waged patent wars in the courts, with little success in bringing a product to market.
"The Wright Brothers, they sued the hell out of everybody," Conley said referring to the aviation pioneers. Three years after their pioneering 1903 flight, the Wrights got a patent, one that included a method for attaining the basic aviation concept of lateral control.
Beginning in 1909, the Wrights fought a patent war with Glenn Curtiss, who was far more successful than Wilbur and Orville in commercializing the airplane. In 1913, Orville finally won. Wilbur died along the way of typhoid fever, his condition possibly worsened by stress over the patent fight.Thomas Campana Jr. won't go down in history in the same league as the Wright Brothers. But "Thomas Campana was a great inventor," Conley said. "I've read his patents."
Campana, who grew up in the Marquette Park neighborhood on Chicago's Southwest Side, began tinkering with electronics in grade school, his father said. He repaired radios as a pre-teen then moved on to TV sets. In high school, he and a friend built a computer. A neighbor who taught electronics once said of Tom that "there was no limit to what he could do," the elder Campana recalled. And he said his son loved his work. "He lived and breathed electronics."
Campana got a tech school degree in communications and received training in broadcasting while in the Air Force. His first patent, one of about 50, came from his first post-service job at Argonne National Laboratory, where he worked in the early 1970s.
The patents at the heart of the NTP dispute stem from Campana's work in the late 1980s and early 1990s with Telefind, a Florida-based paging company.
Campana owned a Chicago Ridge electronics engineering firm called ESA that did Telefind's engineering work. Campana also helped raise money for Telefind and served as the company's vice president of engineering.
Telefind had a nationwide paging network that caught the eye of communications giant AT&T.
At the time, most paging systems only worked regionally; a pager in Chicago, for example, wouldn't work in New York. But Telefind's system allowed for one pager to work throughout the country.
AT&T was looking for a paging service to help beef up a new product, the Safari, a laptop computer it was developing with a Japanese company.
At the time, AT&T operated a system that provided e-mail services to major corporations. Essentially, AT&T wanted to run its e-mail service wirelessly through the Safari laptop via a paging system.
There was one problem. "AT&T did not have the paging expertise," said Murali Narayanan, who was working on the Safari project from the Naperville office of AT&T's Bell Laboratories.
So Narayanan called on Telefind, and Campana's ESA went to work. Campana was "very, very responsive" to what AT&T was looking for, said Narayanan, who now works for Microsoft.
"Tom was a pure entrepreneur," he said. "He was very enthusiastic, like a kid at heart."
In November 1990, Campana demonstrated a prototype of his system at Comdex, a big trade show for the computer industry. His audience: representatives of several major AT&T customers, including UPS, Sears and Xerox.
The test was a success, both Narayanan and Campana testified in court. And that success bred great expectations at Telefind and ESA.
"There was a lot of optimism that AT&T would go with this," said Gary Thelen, who worked for Campana at ESA and helped develop the wireless e-mail system.
Campana, whom Thelen described as a "very energetic, very upbeat" guy, anticipated that AT&T would buy Telefind. But those hopes were dashed.
Further testing showed that Telefind's system didn't work well enough; messages didn't always get through, Narayanan said.
Plus, by June 1991, Telefind had told AT&T that it was running out of money, Narayanan testified in the NTP/RIM lawsuit. "We were very, very concerned."
AT&T dropped Telefind and switched to a rival paging company to work on the Safari project and then eventually shelved the entire project, deeming it impractical.
Telefind went bust not long after AT&T dropped it. ESA had its own problems but survived. "I know [Campana] struggled for money to make the payroll lots of times, but he always made it," Thelen said.
Telefind owed ESA about $400,000--a "substantial sum of money," as Campana later testified. He never got it repaid, Stout said. But Campana, through ESA, did get the e-mail system patents.
In 1992, Campana teamed with Stout, who had been doing patent work for Telefind, to create NTP, which Campana later said stood for "New Technology Products."
NTP's mission: work out licensing agreements for Campana's patents. By 2000, there was no bigger potential licensee than RIM, whose BlackBerry was beginning to prove a hit.
Stout sent a letter to RIM, asking that it pay licensing fees to NTP. RIM never responded and so began a tortuous, much-chronicled legal battle.
A federal jury in 2002 found that RIM was infringing on NTP's patents and ordered it to pay up. The presiding judge, James Spencer, then granted NTP's request for an injunction that would shut down the BlackBerry system. But Spencer stayed the injunction pending appeals.
Last spring, the dispute looked like it might finally end.
RIM and NTP agreed to a preliminary settlement in March, nine months after Campana, a heavy smoker, died at age 57 of esophagus cancer. The settlement called for NTP to get $450 million. But the deal disintegrated over disagreements on how to implement it.
Meanwhile, the wrangling has migrated beyond the courtroom. Not long after the jury ruled against RIM, the director of the U.S. Patent Office ordered a re-examination of NTP's patents, a rare move that NTP claims was prompted by RIM's lobbying.
In recent months, the Patent Office has issued "non-final" rejections of the NTP e-mail patents, essentially saying they don't cover a new invention.
But even if the patent office issues a final rejection and cancels the patents, NTP has a lengthy appellate process at its disposal. Meanwhile, time is running out on RIM to stave off a possible court-ordered shutdown.
Spencer has set a hearing for Friday to revisit the injunction issue, and his decision is expected soon thereafter.
RIM says it has devised a "workaround" solution that would allow the U.S. BlackBerry system to keep running without violating any court orders. Meanwhile, RIM's competitors are trying to capitalize on the uncertainty and poach BlackBerry customers. Several of those larger competitors, such as Good Technology, Visto and Nokia, don't have to worry about being sued by NTP.
They've all signed licensing agreements with the company.
WHAT'S A TROLL?
The "troll" pejorative has been lobbed at companies that own patents but haven't adequately commercialized them or don't intend to. Instead, they seek licensing fees from companies that have developed products based on similar concepts.
Firms that won't pony up get sued for patent infringement. In their defense, companies like NTP, which has taken on BlackBerry's parent firm in court, and others argue that they simply represent inventors asserting their intellectual property rights. Big firms do the same, they say, suing those who violate their patents.
Here are a two other well-known cases with ties to Chicago:
--Eolas Technologies vs. University of California
Chicago-area inventor Michael Doyle of Eolas Technologies Inc. and the University of California claimed Microsoft illegally incorporated their patented technology into its Internet Explorer browser. Microsoft argued the technology was not novel and never should have been patented. A jury awarded Eolas $520 million in 2003.
--MercExchange vs. eBay
Virginia-based MercExchange sued eBay for allegedly infringing on its patent with the "buy it now" feature. MercExchange was awarded $25 million in damages, and a judge issued a permanent injunction to shut down "buy it now."
EBay appealed the injunction, and the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to hear the case this year. If the Court strikes down automatic injunctions in patent infringement cases, it would be a landmark ruling. MercExchange has been working with a small Chicago-based eBay competitor, uBid.
Calm down. Please see this link http://www.mobile-tech-today.com/sto...d=122000I8R7VI. Most of your links were pre court specualtion.
From Mobile Tech Today
Judge Grants Reprieve to BlackBerry Maker
February 24, 2006 2:30PM
RIM chief executive James Balsillie told CNBC television after the hearing that settlement talks will continue but that a favorable decision from the patent office has changed the landscape."These patents are going away," he said.
The maker of the BlackBerry wireless device, Research In Motion, averted a potentially catastrophic court-ordered U.S. shutdown Friday when a judge declined to issue an injunction in a long-running patent case.
Judge James Spencer took no action in the hearing but urged Canadian-based RIM, maker of the BlackBerry, and patent-holding firm NTP to settle their dispute, company officials said after the hearing.
NTP argued for an immediate injunction and payment of $126 million in damages. RIM, citing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's recent rejection of some NTP patents, urged the judge to stay his hand.
"We are grateful to the court for its time and look forward to a final outcome," NTP said in a statement.
"We presented a very strong case and believe, based on the closing remarks of Judge Spencer, that the court was receptive to the merits of our arguments."
RIM chief executive James Balsillie told CNBC television after the hearing that settlement talks will continue but that a favorable decision from the patent office has changed the landscape.
"These patents are going away," he said. "NTP is not bargaining with a fair patent peace proposal and we have a 'workaround' to ensure that our service is going to keep up and running."
The hearing took place in U.S. District Court in Richmond, Virginia.
"This buys RIM some time," said Rod Thompson, a patent attorney for the San Francisco firm Farella Braun and Martell. "The judge is telling both sides, 'Don't make me do this,'" added Thompson.
In 2002, a federal court found that RIM's BlackBerry technology violated patents held by NTP. Research In Motion has repeatedly appealed the original decision all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, to no avail.
But parallel proceedings in the U.S. Patent Office have been going better for the Canadian firm, which has over three million U.S. users and gets a majority of its revenues from U.S. operations.
Just ahead of the court hearing, RIM said it had received word that all three remaining patents had been rejected, based in part on information not considered in the 2002 trial.
"With these rejections, the outcome of the case must be tipping in favor of RIM and against the likelihood of the shutdown," said Sarah Burnett, senior research analyst with London-based Butler Group.
Info-Tech Research Group analyst Carmi Levy said the future of mobile communications is at stake in the case, and argued that the case was based on what he called "patent trolls."
"An injunction would give free reign to patent trolls -- those companies that use the patent system as the exclusive basis for suing other firms over disputed technology," Levy said.
"We are in danger of devolving into an era where technology companies expend their energy on legal battles rather than innovation."
Alternatively, if Judge Spencer ends up ruling in RIM's favor, Levy says that such a ruling would take the brakes off of wireless adoption for those companies that have been waiting on the sidelines for this case to end.
© 2006 Agence France-Presse. All rights reserved.
© 2006 Mobile Tech Today. All rights reserved
[quote=hf1khal]Calm down. Please see this link http://www.mobile-tech-today.com/sto...d=122000I8R7VI. Most of your links were pre court specualtion.
Better yet click here and see BB's future!
Better yet click here and see BB's future![/quote]
I still will not go near that and know many BB users that will not. I know you said that you work for a company that is big, but I am sorry after looking at your posts it sure seems that you are pushing others to change and it sure points that you have an ulitmate target to point. Like was said the sky is not falling, if you go and invest in this unit and then multiply the time and cost it will still be a lot more than what you need to do to implement the workaround.
I empathize for the little guy that is taken advantage of and I will fight for his rights as hard as I can, but what NTP is doing, is nothing for that little guy in your article. They are doing it for their own gratification. Do you think that one penny of any settlement will go to the estte of the little guy your article describes? If you do then I will not continue arguing here with you because I then know that no matter what I say you will never se the light of day.
Your orignal post to me simply shows an anger towards RIM. for what reason I dont know or dont care. Whether real or imaginary does not matter. What does matter is incendiary rhetoric that leads no one any place and gains nothing for anyone. It is tantamount to crying out fire in a crowded theater. My friend you are entitled to your feelings and opinions just as anyone else, all I am asking is to keep any inflamatory comments in check.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.