BREAKING NEWS
Updated: 6:09 p.m. ET March 3, 2006
Research In Motion Ltd., the maker of the BlackBerry e-mail device, Friday announced it has settled its long-running patent dispute with a small Virginia-based firm, averting a possible court-ordered shutdown of the BlackBerry system.

RIM has paid NTP $612.5 million in a “full and final settlement of all claims,” the companies said.

At a hearing last week, NTP had asked a federal court in Richmond, Va., for an injunction blocking the continued use of key technologies underpinning BlackBerry’s wireless e-mail service.

At the hearing, Judge James R. Spencer expressed impatience with RIM and urged a settlement.

“He basically questioned the sanity of RIM, and said it wasn’t acting very rationally,” said Rod Thompson, patent attorney at Farella, Braun and Martel in San Francisco. “His prodding of the parties worked.”

The settlement is on the low end of expectations, Thompson said, especially since RIM will not have to pay any future royalties. There had also been talk of NTP receiving a stake in RIM.

RIM, which is based in Waterloo, Ontario, had already put away $450 million in escrow, the amount of a settlement in 2004 that later fell apart. RIM will record the additional $162.5 million in its fourth-quarter results, it said.

The settlement ends a period of anxiety for many of the more than 3 million BlackBerry users in the United States. Uncertainty over the outcome had some customers wondering whether they would experiences brief outages or even a shutdown.

“I’m relieved,” said Matt Lattman, a management consultant in Boston. “I’ve had it for about a year, and at this point, I can’t imagine life without it.”

RIM had assured users it had developed new software to work around NTP’s patents. But because few details were released, analysts and some corporations expressed concerns about the viability of the technology and the legal ramifications of adopting it.


With a settlement, RIM will be able to avoid any of the headaches associated with introducing this new technology. Even if the software worked, it, too, might have been challenged by NTP, introducing yet another twist to this complicated and long-running case.

In arguing against an injunction, RIM’s attorneys had stressed the public interest in keeping its service running. Government and emergency employees would be exempt from the BlackBerry ban, but sorting them from other users would prove difficult and problematic.

RIM attorneys also noted that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in a proceeding parallel to the Virginia case, was poised to finally reject all patents at the heart of the case.

Spencer first issued an injunction in 2003 but held off on its enforcement during RIM’s appeals. After those efforts largely failed, the case returned to Spencer.


link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11659304/

It was just a matter of time... it was in the interest of all parties to settle. The Judge gave them so many chances...

Nice to just have it over......

...and now we can start it all over ... I give Visto two weeks to file suit against RIM

And as soon as the USPTO gives the final ruling, RIM can sue the pants off NTP to get their money back.

Do you really think NTP was THAT stupid? They managed to squeeze millions out of RIM, so I'm sure this settlement pretty much puts them into the clear for the future.

There's probably a clause preventing RIM from suing NTP ever again.

I'm glad to see this over -- I know that this time around both RIM and NTP has probably made it pretty ironclad and nitpicked every detail, considering the last settlement failed.

Although I feel RIM shouldn't have to give the funds to NTP, I think it's in everyone interests to stop being nervous about the BlackBerry service anymore -- now that it wouldn't shut down. They were scaring away so many U.S. customers to the point that 612 million will be more than paid back in extra revenue in the future!

On what grounds? For attempting to enforce a valid patent? I don't think so. This is what it cost RIM to buy its way out of all past infringements and to take a license to the NTP-owned technology up to the point that the reexam process concludes. Call it a cost of doing business.

I am sad they settled, I guess it is time to go look at a treo :(

While the settlement is a lot of money that could have used for much more useful purposes, at least now RIM can concentrate on the increasing competition out there.

HUH?

As much as we would love to have the boys in Waterloo join us, I think that between suing Microsoft and Good, Visto's legal department is plenty busy. I don't see them suing RIM.

does anyone think the price of BB 8700c will go up cause of the settlment?

I think so.

Your handle sez it all!

Also NTP and Visto are hooked up so perhaps there was something in the deal to prevent Visto from suing RIM in the future!

haha

I think most of America is well enough aware of what went on between NTP and RIM that to get a Jury who didn't think Visto would just be suing RIM for money would be quite hard. As it was said before Visto already has their hands full temporarily. I'm glad it's over so now I can all those people that asked me if I was worried "See I told you I wasn't worried and they'd pay!"

I agree. I personally would rather have seen RIM implement the workaround until the USPTO rejected the remaining patents and NTP get nothing. I hate the precedence being set with these patent troll companies. However, this was about business, not principles.

heh heh... I was just thinking the same thing roofus!

Uhm................... NO.

now I can flip off NTP and will say that use this money to buy RIM stocks because they know it is working.
Glad to this over and life could be lot painless and I hope I will have to press NTP continuously for the last time.

Funny thing is that Good and NTP reached a licensing agreement as well, but that didn't stop Visto from going after Good.

I agree with nb_mitch, actually.

First, let’s face it, NTP got away with stealing $612 million on an overbroad, overvague patent, which it never made its own products from. And the patents have been largely ruled invalid. Yet, thanks to our broken patent and court systems, the invlidation of those patents didn’t mean a thing in this case. I'm not at all happy with the notion that some of the money I pay each month is fattening some patent lawyer's pockets, and encouraging that lawyer to continue to screw it to someone else later on.

All this does is validate the brokenness of the US patent system and the broken legal processes surrounding it, making it ever harder for whoever gets sued next. Remember: Cingular has applied for patents on the smilie. If they get a patent, an even more absurd legal drama will unfold, and you can bet Cingular's lawyers (and Cingular) will get fat off of someone.

Second, this signals to me that RIM’s “workaround” wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. For the longest time we were fed a line that RIM had a workaround and that effectively, they didn’t need to settle. And when experts kept asking the same question we all were - why not just turn the workaround on now and end the case? - there was no answer from RIM. In effect, it feels a lot like Blackberry users were lied to, to give us a false sense of complacency and to prevent more people from researching alternatives. That doesn’t sit well with me.

This isn't going to make me go out and buy a Treo. For me Blackberry still is (unfortunately) the best device for what I need. even so, I don't like paying NTP, and I don't like paying a company that probably lied to me. I'm not nearly the loyal Crackberry addict I was this morning, and you can bet that if another device DOES emerge that does the job just as well, I'm going to seriously consider it.

very well put, I have been seriously considering a Treo myself and with the light you put on the situation I just may.

I think you are misinformed. NTP never created any products, because the sole purpose of the company was to protect the patents that the orginal inventor filed. Also, if you read the story about the inventor he did in fact create a working prototype. He even took the demo to CES one year, but no one purchased it. Eventually he could no longer afford to continue development.

Once again, I think your misinformed. If your read the articles about the workaround it was not difficult to realise that it did work, but not nearly as well as the current method. The way I see it, if the work around had to be implemented, RIM would have lost a lot of current and new customers because the product being offer was not as good or mearly equal to the competition.

RIM does have a working workaround. There's a leaked article describing exactly how it works somewhere in this forum. However, it is not as good as the original technology. So it is the best to keep the orginal design in the interest of people. It is unfortunate that some of the money we pay goes to NTP's pockets, but i think we still need to continue to support company like RIM because they did this settlement for the interest of people. Unlike NTP who just sits there and tries to squeeze every penny out of RIM. They could've settled for 450 million, but ended up getting 612.5. and I'm sure the reason why RIM didn't provide more info on the workaround is because of legal issues. maybe there'll be a patent for this workaround showing up at the patent office... I can never switch to a treo, especially when microsoft is putting their OS on it...

I don't think people really understand. It doesnt matter what the USPTO does at this point...when NTP originally filled the law suit, their technology WAS under patent, so what the USPTO does now is irrelevant to that..that is what the judge has been trying to say for months...

From today's NY Times:

"Research in Motion agreed that NTP would not have to refund the settlement money under any circumstances. Last week the Patent Office rejected the three patents that were still the focus of the case after the appeals. R.I.M. had insisted last year that NTP not be entitled to any money if it lost the appeal and was unable to save its patents.

For its part, NTP agreed that the settlement would include all of R.I.M.'s customers, particularly wireless carriers. A year ago, R.I.M. was concerned that it would settle the case only to find its service bogged down by lawsuits against the companies that deliver it."

If it comes to the settlement between Visto and Good, how much money Good can afford to pay? We know that RIM could have gone up to $1.8 billion, but it is the public company for you.

Dare to share amount of Good's cash reserves with us?

I feel so strongly about this it made me come out of the shadows and register!

RIM DOES have a workaround. It just happened to inconvenience customers by making them load software on all of their BlackBerry's. RIM had to look at what was the better option: Force customers to "service pack" handhelds and STILL face a possible injunction and more litigation if NTP challenged the workaround too, which you know they would

OR

Settle and have it all over with?

I'd settle too given the situation.

I'm very well informed, thank you very much, and that was my whole point, as well as RIM's point at one time. The setting up of a company for the sole purpose of "protecting" a patent that it has no intention on creating a working product based on it is ethically just as bad as cybersquatting. I could have understood if NTP had hired an engineering and development team and was working on capitalizing on the product.

But, can you show me the URL to NTP's website? What kind of products did they come out with? Do they have a single engineer or product developer on staff anymore?

Yes yes, I know the story, very very sad. Again, clearly push e-mail is workable technology and in the post-Blackberry environment, I'm sure NTP could have mustered enough capital investment to produce their own product. Good technology did it. Visto did it. Both ended up getting sued, with differing results.

And they couldn't muster this capital to produce something with their patents, yet somehow, NTP managed to pay a staff of lawyers. Very interesting, indeed.

Let me quote RIM, from the press releases they worked so quickly to obliterate once the settelement was announced. Fortunately, Google doesn't forget so quickly:

But, as you say, the workaround wasn't as good as the real thing. Clearly I *was* misinformed, by RIM. So you must agree with me that RIM lied, then! Good!

Something tells me that RIM may not be done with litigation over this matter, as clearly its conduct and representations to users and investors were false and misleading.

That's an interesting concept. I may not know much about Blackberries, but I'm pretty good when it comes to the law...especially patent law.

We'll leave it at this: You're wrong as a matter of law. If you brought such a lawsuit, you wouldn't survive summary judgment, and might get hit with Rule 11 sanctions.

And what I've been trying to explain on here as well. All this talk about suing NTP to get the settlement money back may make you feel good, but it wouldn't go anywhere. I can't even think of a theory on which to proceed. Maybe roofus, esq. can englighten us...

The term permitting NTP to keep the settlement regardless of the USPTO outcome is a contractual term--adding it prevented the settlement from going south like it did a few months ago. Think about it this way: if you knew you were figuratively speaking about 5 minutes away from a judge entering a final order awarding you some huge sum of money and potentialy enjoining the defendant, would YOU sign a settlement dismissing your case that specified you'd give the money back if the USPTO reexam certificate removed the infringed claims?

Regarding the workaround, you're quoting how an upgraded device will appear to end-users and administrators, but you're being totally ignorant of the fact that the workaround has to be loaded on the BES and all of the devices.

Sure, once loaded, a users device may look/act exactly the same as it did before the workaround was loaded. Neato. Corp. development doesn't have to send a memo out explaining to everyone how to use their "new" BlackBerry.

The fact that the workaround has to be loaded is the real issue. Some folks here administer THOUSANDS of BlackBerrys that would have had to have been reloaded (by hand) to get the workaround installed.

And besides, carriers were testing it, so if it sucked or wasn't all that, someone would have called bullshit by now.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I don't have access to that information. I know we recently received $20 million in funding, so my thought is that investors aren't too concerned with the lawsuit.

Who Cares Its Over Lets Get On With Life!!!!!!!!!!

Woo Hoooooooooooo

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry7250/4.1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)

No offense to good guy, but 20 million... Not all that impressive when you consider 600 million or 1.8 billion... Reminds me of when mike myers asks for 1 million dollars.... .

Actually, I think I'm taking that into account VERY well. Rim stated it very clearly: neither end users NOR adminsitrators would see adifference in operation. Yet it was said earlier in this thread: "If your read the articles about the workaround it was not difficult to realise that it did work, but not nearly as well as the current method."

Taht signals to me that there significant operations hurdles to overcome. If service would be degraded and "not work as well," I think I'd notice that.


Some critics did call bullshit, actually. And the proof is in the pudding: if the workaround really "worked around" the problem, then RIM never would have needed to settle; they could have just flipped it on, and they would no longer be infringing.

RIM is not a charity; they didn't just pay $612 million to NTP's battery of lawyers out of the goodness of their hearts. They paid it because they didn't have a viable option, regardless of them claiming they did.

Scaredpoet:
Just a few observations -

“For the longest time we were fed a line that RIM had a workaround…”You can’t possibly be saying that they didn’t have a workaround, so it was no “line”.

…and that effectively, they didn’t need to settle.”
Who said that, effectively, RIM didn’t need to settle, based solely on the existence of a workaround?

“In effect, it feels a lot like Blackberry users were lied to, to give us a false sense of complacency and to prevent more people from researching alternatives. That doesn’t sit well with me.”
The irony here is that you are castigating RIM for not sticking to its principles (ie: refusing to settle), despite the many obstacles that, by your own admission, it faced (broken court system, fractured patent system, etc.). According to you, RIM should have sacrificed itself on the altar of business principle, allowing unit sales to continue to fall, stock prices to continue to drop, and customer anxiety levels to continue to climb, just to appease those few customers who would be disgruntled by a settlement with NTP. You demanded (emotionally) such sacrifice from them, yet, highly principled as you claim to be, you refuse to sacrifice anything yourself. I submit,
“For me Blackberry still is (unfortunately) the best device for what I need.”
The Blackberry is the best device for what you need, but it is not the only device that can meet your needs. The other devices just don’t meet your needs as well. Applying your mantra of principled behavior, your next course of action should be to sacrifice your need for the best operational device, and supplant with your need to use a lesser device produced by an altogether more principled company. Get rid of your Blackberry - NOW! Unless you do this, your diatribe against RIM appears to be a bit sanctimonious.

“…and you can bet that if another device DOES emerge that does the job just as well, I'm going to seriously consider it.”Again, principle dictates that you absolutely should not wait. Why line the pockets of a bunch of thieving, lying scumbags? You know, the lying charlatans at RIM, and the thieving magpies at NTP.

Something tells me that RIM may not be done with litigation over this matter, as clearly its conduct and representations to users and investors were false and misleading.
You’re joking, right?

Am I happy that RIM settled? Yes. It puts an end to the anxieties felt by the vast majority of their users. Would I have been happier if circumstances had allowed them to play out the entire patent infringement scenario to the bitter end, without the threat of injunction placing extraordinary demands on the process? Of course. But, such is life. Circumstances dictated another path. I have learned something that, just maybe, hasn’t quite sunk in for you yet.

Life is never all about you.

They paid it because they didn't have a viable option, regardless of them claiming they did. If this was truly the case, I suspect that NTP would have gotten a settlement figure a lot closer to its billion dollar demand. But, who knows? The truth is, neither one of us do.

[quote=Silentknight]Scaredpoet:
Just a few observations -

“For the longest time we were fed a line that RIM had a workaround…”You can’t possibly be saying that they didn’t have a workaround, so it was no “line”./[quote]

So why did they need to settle? If this woraround was so darned great and would save the company, why even bother talking to NTP? Why even bother arguing before the court that "2 million man-hours" and approximately $840 per user would be required to make this switch work, why feeding everyone else this line that they actually wouldn't feel a thing?

http://canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...30572/-1/MONEY

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969048863851

Lazardis and Basille have both said it. Rim is "prepared for any contingency." Including not settling and having an injuction.

And the fine people here have said it too:

http://www.blackberryforums.com/rim-stock-legal-discussion/20384-blackberry-contingency-plans-ntp-issue.html
1. As mentioned, RIM has developed a workaround already. They can keep running. NTP is out of luck, they can only sue for retroactive damages -- and the network keeps running."

No, I'm castigating RIM because they lied, and the sooner you accept that, the better off you'll be. They insisted a settlement wasn't necessary to continue operations. Evidently, it was necessary. Please try to keep up.

Not at all! They only had to do one thing: turn on the workaround, pay retro damages, and walk away. If RIM was telling the truth, the injunction wouldn't have meant a thing. No one would have sacrificed anything except NTP.

None of that would have happened at all if RIM actually did have a viable workaround and just turned it on, announcing to users, shareholders and the government that RIM did indeed have the situation well at hand.

Why didn't they just turn it on? I keep asking that question and no one seems to have an answer except that maybe the woraround would have caused serious inconvenience. Which means that when RIM announced that users and administrators "would not notice a change in operation," they lied.

Settlements don't disgruntle me. Lying vendors do. I spent an afternoon on Friday decertifying a vendor at work for misrepresenting their capabilities, claiming they perform certain functions for the organization I work for, and later admitting they could not.

In my opinion, RIM very nearly did the same thing. And I know in your fanboy li'l eyes, RIM is the savior and is all knowing and can do no wrong, and that's fine. But the facts bear themselves out.

You seem to be showing far more emotion than I. All I want to know is how people can tolerate being lied to. because see, in the business, when vendors lie about their capabilities, it hampers the work of the business contracting that work out. And if RIM hadn't blinked, I get the impression that a service we rely on would have either been degraded, or nonexistent.

If your local power company claims that it's disaster-proof, and the next day, a natural disaster wipes out the power grid for three days, are you going to continue to sit there in the dark after the grid's been re-established, on "principle?" Probably not.

If the people you vote for in an election lose, are you going to move to another country, on principle? And if you can't get a Visa or can't afford to move, are you going to shoot yourself, on principle? Probably not.

Unfortunately, RIM provides a service that a lot of corporations and government entities rely on, and they are sadly, best at the game.

I don't like Microsoft either. Unfortunately, the applications I use are not available on Mac or UNIX. That doesn't mean I'm going to not use those apps, like apparently you expect I should.

That said, if something comes out that the does the job equally as well or better, I'm GOING to switch to it.

This isn't about life. It's about business. And the last time a business lied to 3 million+ people about its viability, the company was forced into bankruptcy and its corporate officers are on trail now. *shrug* RIM got very lucky. And the next time they get in a bind like this and claim that everything is okay and the world of RIM is all sweetness and mirth, I'm not going to be so naive, that's all. You, evidently, will. Good luck with that!

How much do you think the retro damages would have been?