Today they steal your idea, then you sue them. Then they countersue you with whatever patent portfolio they have. Then you need to hire expensive lawyers.
If you can't afford to market you probably can't affort to go to court.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Other Tech Companies Face Lawsuit Over Wireless Email Patents
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Today they steal your idea, then you sue them. Then they countersue you with whatever patent portfolio they have. Then you need to hire expensive lawyers.
If you can't afford to market you probably can't affort to go to court.
Accessing email involves connecting to a server over some sort of network connection. How that network connection is established is an entirely separate technical matter, and should be completely transparent to the process of accessing email.
I would have thought that, at the very least, ALOHAnet would show prior art for wireless e-mail 40 years ago....
Well if that is the case then Apple and the others should have to pay a portion of the original $600 million. Or do you think RIM should just pay the bill for all of them?
That's a ridiculous claim for them to make. Considering wireless communications, and email already existed, I'm not sure how anyone could claim to "invent" wireless email.
They invented (or claimed to invent) a system for delivery of wireless emails; which is different. I've tried to decipher what exactly the system is. It seems to be the graphics are designed to be vague and the text indecipherable. If I sent those to clients as part of our technical documentation, they'd email me back: "WTF?"
Can anyone tell me how exactly this system works? I don't understand why wireless email even presents such challenges, considering email was designed to cater with clients who could be offline.
You seem to have a keen understanding of patent applications
You can't have something in layman's terms because then laymen might be able to do their job.
I wonder if he can sue all computer manufacturers as well as all manufacturers of wireless routers. Hell, he should sue dial-up companies as a lot of that traffic is routed through satellite and is therefore wireless.
This is why software patents make no sense
Too bad "Wireless Email" doesn't actually exist. The email software doesn't know that there isn't a wire, it just sees a connection from the TCP/IP stack. Putting those words together doesn't mean you invented something.
Maybe I should patent "Email over power lines". Then I can sue if ISP's ever provide internet service over the electric grid.
Too bad "Wireless Email" doesn't actually exist. The email software doesn't know that there isn't a wire, it just sees a connection from the TCP/IP stack. Putting those words together doesn't mean you invented something.
Maybe I should patent "Email over power lines". Then I can sue if ISP's ever provide internet service over the electric grid.
While I do agree with you. The validity of these patents is the issue I take. Wireless email on tablet like devices goes all the way back to research concept devices back in the 80s. Places like PARC and the MIT Media lab was doing email off "clipboard computers" as some called them back in the day.
If I was running Apple legal, I'd have a team of paralegals and a few engineers hit several campuses. Have them through the dissertation stacks finding projects that predate these patents. Once that is found, you can give the plaintiff a choice to drop the suite or risk invalidation and a compromise of their valuation as a whole. This has worked in the past in other cases.
I'm sure there are a few on here with Federal Patent Attorney numbers who could chime in on here.
The fact that RIM paid up on it is going to kill the others. RIM was and still is the standard all other wireless emailed is compared with and the fact that they paid up is going to hurt the others.
NTP went after the biggest player in wireless email service first and won. Now they are going after the ones with much deeper pockets and I have a feeling they will be paying up.
Now I am not a fan of patents being used as weapons and using massive portfolios to defend themselves with.
My guess is if NTP claims patents afer from earily 90's that will beat out any one else in that area. RIM was using wireless email in what late 90's. That means NTP came first
I do find it funny people go on and attack NPC for being a patent troll but 100% back apple when they go after others with even more troll worthy cases.
NTP went after the biggest player in wireless email service first and won. Now they are going after the ones with much deeper pockets and I have a feeling they will be paying up.
Now I am not a fan of patents being used as weapons and using massive portfolios to defend themselves with.
My guess is if NTP claims patents afer from earily 90's that will beat out any one else in that area. RIM was using wireless email in what late 90's. That means NTP came first
I do find it funny people go on and attack NPC for being a patent troll but 100% back apple when they go after others with even more troll worthy cases.
RIM, who obviously had a lot at stake and a lot of resources, worked long and hard to attempt to invalidate the patents. They were unable to take them all out. The law has changed since then, so the new defendants have some hope, but it's going to be an uphill climb. (And you can bet dissertation stacks were searched - it's standard practice).
P.S.: no such thing as federal patent attorney numbers.
Right and apple isnt a patent troll either? Apple is suing HTC for infringing on its stupid patent for the lock screen. How is that innovative? Thats like someone patenting clicking a button on a computer screen to unlock it
Some of the NTP patents that they were suing RIM for violating were rejected after reexamination by the Patent and Trademark office. There was evidently some question as to whether some documents in Norway counted as 'prior work' and could have invalidated most of NTP's patents.
Eventually this case can be appealed to the SCOTUS and you can guess (I'll give you one) how the 'Roberts Court™' would rule...
The problem with the RIM case, and probably the reason NTP won the case is because RIM apparently knew of the existence of the NTP patent(s) and had requested reexaminations of them by the PTO for quite a while before NTP became aware of RIM's violations. The verdict of the court was that RIM 'willfully and knowingly' violated the NTP patents. It's hard to prove that you didn't know of them after requesting a reexamination of them...
There is still a chance that the patents that NTP hold could be invalidated and leave NTP with a huge bill owed to RIM (who I hope will descend on NTP like a pack of month starved vultures) or that a major key part of their patent case will be denied.
Personally I think software patents are stupid and a dramatic overreach of any authority and intent or original scope of what a 'patent' was supposed to be used for. A piece of software is not a tangible piece of property and affording it the protection of a patent is absurd to the highest degree. But, if I ran the world a whole bunch of things would be different so it's not such a bad thing that I don't I guess...
Eventually this case can be appealed to the SCOTUS and you can guess (I'll give you one) how the 'Roberts Court™' would rule...
The problem with the RIM case, and probably the reason NTP won the case is because RIM apparently knew of the existence of the NTP patent(s) and had requested reexaminations of them by the PTO for quite a while before NTP became aware of RIM's violations. The verdict of the court was that RIM 'willfully and knowingly' violated the NTP patents. It's hard to prove that you didn't know of them after requesting a reexamination of them...
There is still a chance that the patents that NTP hold could be invalidated and leave NTP with a huge bill owed to RIM (who I hope will descend on NTP like a pack of month starved vultures) or that a major key part of their patent case will be denied.
Personally I think software patents are stupid and a dramatic overreach of any authority and intent or original scope of what a 'patent' was supposed to be used for. A piece of software is not a tangible piece of property and affording it the protection of a patent is absurd to the highest degree. But, if I ran the world a whole bunch of things would be different so it's not such a bad thing that I don't I guess...
Right and apple isnt a patent troll either? Apple is suing HTC for infringing on its stupid patent for the lock screen. How is that innovative? Thats like someone patenting clicking a button on a computer screen to unlock it
I believe that was an actual patent that was being adjudicated and was found to be unenforceable...
I'm sure that some patent troll has thought of patenting breathing but apparently couldn't afford the bribes and court costs of defending it... It should be noted that human and animal genetic information has been successfully patented according to a rumor that I heard a few years ago... Interesting...
indeed! NTP's patents are legit and REAL properly laid out designs and how wireless email works.
Oddly enough I can ONLY SEE Motorola being exempt from this. Why?
Just before NTP went after RIM, NTP went after the THEN (2001) parent company of Good Technology Inc' which Motorola licensed their push technology from. Motorola purchase ALL rights, and licensing agreements from that company, absorbed it into their own and null & voids NTP's claim on Motorola. That said HTC did use a similar interest in licensing for a VERY short term.
Vigo, Good Technology Inc (the push that supports WinMobile, Palm, Symbian and even Blackberry's) used NTP's technology. RIM's BlackBerry push is implemented much differently but they STILL use that technology ~ RIM DID put up an 8mth highly market/news publicized fight and succumbed to NTP's might to a VERY LARGE sum.
Microsoft's marketing and technical teams should have "PUSHED"; well Pull/Pushed (pun intended hehe), their awareness of ActiveSync and Exchange 'push' 2003 to supporting more platforms but alas they were stupid and VERY slow.
HTC, SonyEricsson, and heck even Motorola if found liable they can cop out due to licensing Exchange ActiveSync solutions from Microsoft; even Apple can and MS will take the full brunt of this storm.
If Apple was smart they'd seriously bolster the native OS X & iOS4 mail clients to offer more features and power and then market it like a fa'ma'.
Radio tele-type predates
wireless radio transmissions of messages = RTTY. So there is a wireless message system the predates micro computers & the troll.
wireless radio transmissions of messages = RTTY. So there is a wireless message system the predates micro computers & the troll.
