BlackBerry users are once again
focusing their attention on Richmond,
VA and U.S. District Court of Judge
James R. Spencer. On Monday the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from
BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd. leaving it in the hands of the District
Courts who could impose an injunction, cutting off access to millions of users
in the US.
This is the latest step in a legal battle initiated by NTP Inc., a small Virginia company, who claims ownership of a patent on the technology that drives the BlackBerry platform. This latest step in the proceedings comes after a previous federal appeals court ruling decided that Canada based RIM did indeed infringe on the patents held by NTP. RIM has argued that it isn't subject to US patent infringement laws because it is based in Canada along with the main relay station for its e-mail and data transmission services. The federal appeals court ruling stated that RIMs customers in the US, of which there are about 3 million, are indeed subject to U.S. laws governing patent infringement and intellectual property rights, and could thus be prevented from using the BlackBerry service.
While the average U.S. Joe Schmoe BlackBerry owner may be standing on shaky ground, it seems Uncle Sam and his employees are above the patent and intellectual property laws that are at the center of this debate. NTP attorneys have said that government and emergency workers who have come to rely on BlackBerry service for their work, would be exempt from any potential "BlackBerry Blackout" while other users could be out of luck.
News source: The Sun Journal / Associated Press
News source: MSNBC
This is the latest step in a legal battle initiated by NTP Inc., a small Virginia company, who claims ownership of a patent on the technology that drives the BlackBerry platform. This latest step in the proceedings comes after a previous federal appeals court ruling decided that Canada based RIM did indeed infringe on the patents held by NTP. RIM has argued that it isn't subject to US patent infringement laws because it is based in Canada along with the main relay station for its e-mail and data transmission services. The federal appeals court ruling stated that RIMs customers in the US, of which there are about 3 million, are indeed subject to U.S. laws governing patent infringement and intellectual property rights, and could thus be prevented from using the BlackBerry service.
While the average U.S. Joe Schmoe BlackBerry owner may be standing on shaky ground, it seems Uncle Sam and his employees are above the patent and intellectual property laws that are at the center of this debate. NTP attorneys have said that government and emergency workers who have come to rely on BlackBerry service for their work, would be exempt from any potential "BlackBerry Blackout" while other users could be out of luck.
News source: The Sun Journal / Associated Press News source: MSNBC
It does not matter if they have come to 'rely' on it. I am sure a business person out in the private sector relies on the Blackberry technology to stay in touch with business contacts and the like.
Hopefully, this will be resolved such that everyone has an equal chance to use the service.
-- OxygenOne
Blackmail? Yes but they also have to know that a huge amount of customer sales will be lost and millions of dollars will be lost every year. This will cause a lot of cutbacks in the company and it will eventually fold anyways.
The first point that should have everybody up in arms is if another company, outside of the U.S. mind you, should be accountable for patent laws owned by organizations within America. Good ol’ international patent laws always getting people’s panties in a knot. This isn’t even my major point of concern.
It has become quite obvious in recent years, with the RIM case really catching the public eye, that current patent laws are failing with modern inventions. Patent law was created to allow innovators a chance to create something exciting and new without the threat of having that idea stripped from them by some other corporation. It was meant as a temporary holding right. Now companies like NTP come along and disgrace the law’s very nature. They go around and buy up patents and rights to inventions like they were going out of style. From what I understand, they are accusing RIM of violating a patent they bought 10 years ago. They have spent zero money on research for that idea. They failed to do anything even remotely conceivable as to bring a product to market. They have failed to nurture or enhance the idea. All the while, a foreign company creates a solid device that is very marketable and has become ingrained in the corporate world. Now they are facing a lawsuit because of their innovation.
Now, the U.S. government is not trying to “be above the law” as OxygenOne has stated. It was NTP themselves who have stated they would not shutdown government users. The very fact that RIM has been able to create a product that is so relied upon in both government and private sector proves merit. If NTP didn’t lax their enforcement, the U.S. government would likely not even consider their case. To counter my own rant, yeah sure your patent is applicable to foreign organizations, as long as it doesn’t affect 3 million people that help develop this nation’s ideas and policies.
Back on topic, stop being childish, work on something creative, and then come back and discuss the merits of intellectual property rights of NTP and their (un)innovativeness.
I personally don't think it should be NTP's decision on who gets to use the devices (like they can't say "Oh the government can still use it!"
Seriously. Stupid case. Stupid company. And what gives them the balls to turn to the other company and TELL them who they can and cannot still sell to. If I was RIM I would just rework my code or whatever, re-release the device and continue on or call this a defeat of some sort. Not start to go "Oh thank you for allowing the government to continue our devices. You're so sweet. The other people people don't matter anyways. It's only the other 70% of our business".
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.