RIM Told to Pay $147 Million in Software Patent Dispute(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
RIM Told to Pay $147 Million in Software Patent Dispute
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/technology/rim-told-to-pay-147-million-for-violation-of-patents.html
2 comments
...and the pain just keeps on piling on for RIM. A lot of it was brought about by their own hubris but I must admit I am starting to feel a little sorry for RIM...
Unfortunately RIM is a great target for these patent trolls as they have enough money to pay damages, but not nearly enough to go on the offensive against these parasites.
They don't sound like patent trolls:
"The company claimed it had disclosed details of the technology to RIM during licensing discussions. After declining to take a license, the BlackBerry maker modified its software to include the patented systems, Mformation said in its complaint."
"The company claimed it had disclosed details of the technology to RIM during licensing discussions. After declining to take a license, the BlackBerry maker modified its software to include the patented systems, Mformation said in its complaint."
How does that mean they aren't patent trolls?
Surely the standard procedure for a patent troll is: Find company doing whatever-it-is; get in touch with them and say "We think you're using our IP; how about licensing it from us?"; talk to them; either license or sue.
However, as it happens it doesn't appear that Mformation are pure patent trolls; they do actually sell software.
Surely the standard procedure for a patent troll is: Find company doing whatever-it-is; get in touch with them and say "We think you're using our IP; how about licensing it from us?"; talk to them; either license or sue.
However, as it happens it doesn't appear that Mformation are pure patent trolls; they do actually sell software.
After declining to take a license, the BlackBerry maker modified its software to include the patented systems, Mformation said in its complaint.
Seems to not agree with what you think happened:
Find company doing whatever-it-is; get in touch with them and say "We think you're using our IP; how about licensing it from us?"; talk to them; either license or sue.
Seems to not agree with what you think happened:
Find company doing whatever-it-is; get in touch with them and say "We think you're using our IP; how about licensing it from us?"; talk to them; either license or sue.
What I find most concerning about this is that the -idea- of responding to control messages sent via special e-mails was deemed worthy of $8 per unit. The end company doesn't get enough $s per unit to value individual ideas this highly. Even if I were willing to grant that this is an idea deserving of patent protection, and even if I was willing to consider $0 to go from the idea to a functioning implementation, there are definitely hundreds, probably thousands, perhaps even millions of ideas of this complexity involved in this one product. Individual devices would have to be priced like airplanes if this is deemed a reasonable price for each individual detail of how it works.