I wish I didn't love saying 'I told you so,' but when I've actually put work into learning about a particular subject, and my analysis seems to be about dead-on, I can't help but gloat.
Important things to remember: 1.) RIM's already lost. They were found guilty 2.) NTP was awarded enhanced damages, but NOT because RIM was 'stealing' IP, as #3 alleges. In fact, NTP *GRANTS* the fact that RIM had no prior knowledge of the Campana patents (the one's in question) 3.) RIM's appeal did VERY little to strengthen its case. It was remanded for review of the judge's rendering of of miniscule elements of the case, unlikely to seriously reverse the decision. 4.) RIM has seriously hacked off James Spencer. He is not happy with their behavior at all, and rightfully so. In one instance, it looks as if RIM executives lied on the stand, though no formal charges were pressed. In another, RIM lawyers submitted a motion 4 times, it was denied four times, and was almost the exact same motion. Spencer's not an idiot. 5.) Spencer also doesn't particularly care what the USPTO finds in terms of validity, because it has been argued by NTP, and he agrees, that once the patent is ruled invalid, NTP will appeal, a process that could take years, and he "has spent enough of my life on NTP and RIM." 6.) NTP gains nothing by an injunction against RIM. The injunction is meant to force a licensing agreement for the technology.
Hope this helps. As I mentioned before, check www.findlaw.com and Lexis Nexis if you have access at your university (or law firm, though if you're at your firm, you probably don't need my opinion...)
HP's Jon Rubenstein told us that his company wanted to veer in a new direction, and veer it surely did -- the HP Veer 4G will arguably be the smallest fully-functional smartphone on the market when it goes on sale May 15th.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Finally, someone who knows what they're talking about posting about the RIM/NTP case: a patent lawyer.
If anyone is curious, there are several comments at this (http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/19/ntp-dont-cry-dry-your-eyes/) post that help illuminate the subject.
I wish I didn't love saying 'I told you so,' but when I've actually put work into learning about a particular subject, and my analysis seems to be about dead-on, I can't help but gloat.
Important things to remember:
1.) RIM's already lost. They were found guilty
2.) NTP was awarded enhanced damages, but NOT because RIM was 'stealing' IP, as #3 alleges. In fact, NTP *GRANTS* the fact that RIM had no prior knowledge of the Campana patents (the one's in question)
3.) RIM's appeal did VERY little to strengthen its case. It was remanded for review of the judge's rendering of of miniscule elements of the case, unlikely to seriously reverse the decision.
4.) RIM has seriously hacked off James Spencer. He is not happy with their behavior at all, and rightfully so. In one instance, it looks as if RIM executives lied on the stand, though no formal charges were pressed. In another, RIM lawyers submitted a motion 4 times, it was denied four times, and was almost the exact same motion. Spencer's not an idiot.
5.) Spencer also doesn't particularly care what the USPTO finds in terms of validity, because it has been argued by NTP, and he agrees, that once the patent is ruled invalid, NTP will appeal, a process that could take years, and he "has spent enough of my life on NTP and RIM."
6.) NTP gains nothing by an injunction against RIM. The injunction is meant to force a licensing agreement for the technology.
Hope this helps. As I mentioned before, check www.findlaw.com and Lexis Nexis if you have access at your university (or law firm, though if you're at your firm, you probably don't need my opinion...)