Will RIM Go Full-On Patent Troll?
from the if-you-can't-innovate,-you-litigate dept
RIM was the defendant in one of the most well known patent troll lawsuits of all time -- the fight against NTP, a company that claimed to have more or less invented wireless email. In the end, even though the USPTO had problems with the patents, RIM ended up settling for $612 million. What most people don't remember, however, is that one of the reasons that RIM got sued in the first place was that the guy behind NTP read an article in the newspaper about RIM suing tons of competitors over its own patents. The company hasn't seemed quite as aggressive about its patents since then -- but perhaps that's going to change. Reuters is reporting that, as RIM has been struggling to compete in the marketplace, it's hired a law firm to help it consider more options and it appears that getting more money from its patents is one of the options being explored. Considering just how "valuable" patents have become lately due to ridiculous disputes and awards, this isn't surprising. But it's pretty sad to see companies increasingly turning to patent trolling and shaking down actual innovators when they can no longer compete in the market.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: patent troll, uspto
Companies: ntp, rim
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
what else does RIM have?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now it seems those who can not do, troll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it ethical? No, but then again what corporation is ethical. The problem is not companies that abuse the system, but the system itself that allows to be abused. Corporations are not human beings, they do not hold the concept of ethics, but the concept of profitability. If the system allows to be exploited in such stupid ways, we can't just expect companies to stop suing each other out of the kindness of their hearts. While there are some noble efforts (twitter as a recent example), ultimately they are meaningless.
Something major would have to happen to shake things up, so we can even start moving towards reforming the patent system, RIM lawsuits however aren't it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you have an MBA because I think they teach this in the MBA programs. Corporations are just paperwork, but they are run by people and therefore should be held to an ethical, moral standard. Saying the "company did it" is just a convenient way for people to check their morals at the door.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
To be fair, what Mike doesn't mention is that the lawyers may also be there to package up the patents, working out a cross licensing arrangement, preparing them for sale to another company (hello Google!). He draws the conclusion of patent trolling, it's not a foregone conclusion yet.
Further, what Mike doesn't talk about is that these patents only have a certain life, and they are gone. Soon enough, all of the patents in wireless will be expired, and the supposed patent thicket he goes on and on about in different posts will drop and all will be perfect and peachy. Some of those patents have already expired, and others are already well into their second decade. While 20 years may seem like a long time (especially if you are only in your 20s) but really, it's not a long time in the grand scheme of things. Whatever restrictions that exist will drop away, and life goes on. The period of patent is short when compared to the period of non patent (less than 20 years, versus infinity going forward). It's just not as big a deal as Mike makes it out to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is an eternity in the tech sector. Just look how far the internet, smartphones and tablets have come in 20 years. Patents create a monopoly on technology that could be benefiting society now. If we had to wait for 20 years we would still be using flip phones. Instead, I have a phone that can make calls, email, text, internet, video, photographs, maps & navigation, etc. Somewhere here, there was an article about how many patents a smartphone has and I can guarantee that not every mfg is paying for every possible patent. If they did, a phone would be $1,000 or more and wouldn't have near the technology they have. Would you really say that is a better situation than the one we have today?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Can't see the forest for the trees? How can we come this far in 20 years if patents are so abusive?
You have a contradiction you need to clear up - either we are progressing rapidly, or patents are blocking everything. Which one is supported by reality, what is in plain sight, and what you have just stated yourself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What Mike doesn't show you in the whole discussion is the amount of money paid in licensing fees, and how that money goes back into the system to further promote the businesses.
Billions aren't wasted on patent lawsuits - where do you get that number?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because this extreme abuse of the patent system is a very recent thing in the tech sector. Just a few years ago, it wasn't common practice, and 20 years ago it was almost unheard of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is almost like you are reading out of the patent-troll playbook.
"recovering the unpaid license fees" for something that they did not actually create, market or sell might be profitable but it is not right. And more and more this kind of action weakens the framework they lean on to pull off these stunts.
Even if there were no more patents that claim to cover smartphones (and/or handheld computer devices and/or computerized phone tablet devices and/or anything not yet invented) issued starting Today we would still be looking at a mess of cross-suits and patents claiming to cover the idea of pressing a button to input a number for the next 20 years.
20 more years of lawyers being paid instead of actual engineers, of money being moved from companies that are successful to companies that are failures.
golly, you are something special.
Let me take that absurd reduction even farther! 20 years compared to infinity is nothing, so lets just end all of these patents now. I mean, it is just not a big deal, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait, you mean he's pirating our drama? Stop him now, someone!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
> ethical. The problem is not companies that abuse the
> system, but the system itself that allows to be abused.
> Corporations are not human beings, they do not hold the
> concept of ethics
I keep seeing this idea around once in a while. It is seriously wrong though.
Firstly, if the system is broken, those who abuse it still bear moral responsibility. One can't argue that if most around are crooks, it's OK to be a crook too.
Secondly, concept of ethics applies to corporations fully. Corporations consist of people, they have leaders, and etc. Not unlike countries and governments, corporations make decisions and execute them. There are those who are in charge, those who implement and etc. All these together can be judged on ethical grounds, the same way like can potentially blame a government and its executioners for being corrupt, for engaging in some atrocities and so on, one can blame a corporation for engaging in unethical protection racket practices, such as patent trolling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I thought it was funny that RIM lost that lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
nti
The Internet (the web as we know it) is not even 20 years old NOW. Look at all that has come from the web since 1994-ish and now imagine all of that innovation and growth locked up behind patents until 2-3 years FROM NOW.
Try to get some perspective on these things before posting something so absurd and foolish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So....
I thought we had that penciled in for this Friday, 3pm (EST).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what's wrong with monetization?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
another biased article
Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, shell company, etc. It all means one thing: “we’re using your invention and we’re not going to pay or stop”. This is just dissembling by large infringers and their paid puppets to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft. The fact is, many of the large multinationals who defame inventors in this way themselves make no products in the US or create any American jobs and it is their continued blatant theft which makes it impossible for the true creators to do so.
Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Essentially, large infringers now have your gun and all the bullets. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don’t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.
Those wishing to help fight big business giveaways should contact us as below and join the fight as we are building a network of inventors and other stakeholders to lobby Congress to restore property rights for all patent owners -large and small.
For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org/default.html#pt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]