Comments on: U.S. Supreme Court rejects RIM's appeal
U.S. shutdown of BlackBerry service appears imminent as appeal in a patent infringement case from RIM is rejected.
U.S. shutdown of BlackBerry service appears imminent as appeal in a patent infringement case from RIM is rejected.
December 6, 2009 12:23 PM PST
December 6, 2009 12:05 PM PST
December 6, 2009 11:00 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
It will be painful, but they have to play by thier own rules too. If they're going to allow bad patents, and enforce them, then they'll have to suffer with the rest of us.
Just like a team has the option overturn a rule violation in american football, NTP is allowing part of the infringment to continue.
I don't like Blackberry. I am a Palm guy myself, but everybody is up in arms that the "government" is doing something underhanded here, but they are not. NTP is giving them a favor, just as an employee jumps at the get their boss a cup of coffee to get on his/her good side.
The other thing that bothers me is the whole idea behind the patent in question about sending electronic messages over RF filed in 1991. Weren't ham radio users doing this same thing before then? Also isn't this sort of the same idea behind the US National Atomic Clock in Colorado??? Transmitting a time message to clocks capable of receiving the RF signal? Not email so to speak, but you are still sending a message over RF.
Can someone also post a link to NTP's website? I google NTP and find everything but them. I'm just curious as to what NTP actually does do, besides patent vague ideas and then demand even more than the settled sum of $450 million. Extortion and greed are the first to come to mind.
And some people still think we should allow this in Europe? This hasn't happened yet, and hope it won't happen in the future..
At the same time who are the other licensee and how much did they pay out. Its only fair to pay as much as the next competitor for licence fee.
Basically sounds like bad patents bad judges and somebody throwing money around to keep a superior product off the market - hmmm did some one say microsoft hmmmm...
LOL.... Uncle Bill is at it again....
This smacks of the same attitude the government takes regarding eminent domain.
Look into the eminent domain case with justice Souter going on. He voted to strengthen eminent domain laws and neighbors of his are trying to use eminent domain to take his 200 yesr old cabin to prove a point.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander!!!
If this company had actually *produced* a device and was trying to enter into competition with RIM , maybe this case would have more merit.
As it is, this is a blatant attempt for a non-productive member of the market to gain from a productive member of the market. Seems to me this is a case for U.S. regulation. Although given the apparent incompetenence of the U.S. government led to this situation in the first place, maybe not.
I'm sure RIM will triumph in the end. The Blackberry is such a useful device, some Supreme Court judge will get pissed off that his isn't working.
RIM had to do a patent search and ignored the danger of the NTP claims, thereby endangering their company and customers.
Both firms demonstrated the highest legal (and lowest moral) behaviour and ignored technical ethics. For this betrayal of the public trust at least the NTP management and legal staff will be rewarded beyond all imagination.
Hey, we as a society dictate who gets power and money. So it is really our fault if we continue to let those who interpret laws steal from those who create things of value.
By exempting government and emergency services from the Blackberry blackout, isn't the federal court endorsing the theft of technology from both NTP and RIM?
- While companies OUTSOURCE, This one NOT allowed in the 'game'???
- by btljooz January 25, 2006 5:49 PM PST
- US companies take over foreign markets but won't let foreign markets in US???
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(27 Comments)What's wrong with this picture? ;)