RIM releases BlackBerry workaround design

TalkBack 35 of 58:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

squatting

Like it or not patent and property law has evolved over centuries, usually from common law. There is no distinction between kinds of property. If you own something then it's yours unless the government decides to take it and compensate you for it. They can do this with your house and with your patent.
The problem with any law is it has to be exact, so people know clearly where the boundary of the law lies. You can't have a law that gives someone a patent unless people on forums think someone else should have the patent instead. You have to come up with definitions and either stick with them or change them to another clear definition.
If you don't allow people to have patents without using them then companies like IBM would lose half their patents. They develop inventions and then license them out, and most of their patents are older and not used except for revenue raising. They are the Patent Balrog, complaining about patent trolls.
All these court cases are companies selecting what argument makes them money, none of them care about right and wrong in patent law. RIM know they are stealing from NTP, that's why they set up the server in Canada to try and get around the patent. In fact it worked with some method claims which were unenforceable for that reason.
If you make squatting on patents illegal then you have to define how much squatting is illegal. Should a company have to spend X dollars on a patent to keep it? Form a business of X size? Sell X products in a year? Should the same rules apply to patents on oil tanker designs as coffe cups? It all becomes hopelessly vague which is why they make an exact definition and let the courts decide.
For a patent to be valid it must distinctly point out the invention which means it must clear state what is the invention and what is not. So an infringer can read the patent and design something close to but not the same as the invention and know from the wording they haven't infringed. A patent is not supposed to scare away people from inventing anything similar, the boundary of a patent must be black and white and not vague or it is invalid.
So NTPs patent is very exact in its boundaries and RIM knew all along they went over those boundaries. Most of their arguments have been so nonsensical they risked contempt of court. They are thieves, pure and simple, and they know it.

Posted by: zzgorme   Posted on: 02/10/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Infrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now