<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;palm&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:54:40 PST</pubDate>
<title>Chubby Checker Sues Two Companies For $500 Million Over Wang-Measuring App Downloaded 84 Times</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/10011321971/chubby-checker-sues-two-companies-500-million-over-wang-measuring-app-downloaded-84-times.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/10011321971/chubby-checker-sues-two-companies-500-million-over-wang-measuring-app-downloaded-84-times.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Here's a question that has been keeping me awake for the past several years: what would I call a smart phone application designed to approximate the size of my naughty parts? The answer, of course, is to call it the Chubby Checker, which is exactly <a href="http://www.appitalism.com/app/palm-webos/245057-the-chubby-checker-beta/">what a company did</a> some time ago. Apparently 1960's rock and <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/feb/14/chubby-checker-sues-hewlett-packard">roll legend Chubby Checker is so pissed off about it</a> that he wants approximately <i>all of the money</i> (by which he means a hell of a lot more money than) the app ever made. And, for some reason, he wants it from HP and Palm, who no longer offer the app at all due to the platform being completely dead, and who appear to have complied with his requests in every way. There's a joke about Palm being involved in a penis size app, but most of it is too vulgar for Techdirt's audience. Let's just say the punchline is "That's what I call two in the hand and one in the bush!" and get back to the story.
<blockquote>
<i>Checker's lawyers are seeking half a billion dollars for the "irreparable damage and harm" caused by the Chubby Checker, an app for Hewlett-Packard's Palm OS platform. "This lawsuit is about preserving the integrity and legacy of a man who has spent years working hard [editor's note: HA!] at his musical craft and has earned the position of one of the greatest musical entertainers of all time," explained lawyer Willie Gary.</i></blockquote>
Yes, according to Willie [editor's note: his name <i>had</i> to be Willie, didn't it?], an application from a company now extinct, released for a mobile platform also extinct, has caused irreparable harm to a rocker from the 60's. Okay, apologies for digging into this, but that's what the post requires. A chubby is a term for a man's wang. If you're going to check it out, chubby checker describes the app. Sorry, but that's the deal. And I want to know who, out of the grand total of <i>84 people</i> who downloaded this app, in any way thought about <i>The Twist</i>, or in any possible way thought that this app was endorsed by the 71 year old man born Earnest Evans. Because here's the thing: if you associated a penis and a song about a dance in which you twist into knots, you're a masochist <i>and</i> an idiot. And, frankly, the tarnishment aspect of their complaint is the <i>most</i> reasonable part of it all.<br />
<br />
That's because of their ridiculous request for $500 million for an app downloaded 84 times on a platform now defunct from a company also defunct. And <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/603548-ernest-evans-v-hp.html">their filing</a> is against HP and Palm, not the actual app developer, who actually took the app down in September of last year, the same month when that same filing shows Checker's lawyers first sent HP/Palm their cease and desist (filing embedded below). So, they took a dead app for a dead platform that almost <i>nobody downloaded</i> and injected all of it back into the public news realm, and Checker's/Evans'/Whoever's lawyers claim the <i>app</i> is the one causing harm to the brand?  It seems a hell of a lot more likely that <i>filing this ridiculous lawsuit</i> is going to cause harm to Checker's brand than anything HP or Palm did. Per <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/famed-attorney-willie-gary-files-half-billion-dollar-lawsuit-on-behalf-of-music-legend-chubby-checker-against-hewlett-packard-and-palm-inc-for-copyright-infringement-2013-02-12">their own hilarious press release</a>:
<blockquote>
<i>The lawsuit alleges that the egregious and flagrant acts of Hewlett Packard and Palm, Inc., if not stopped immediately, will permit Defendants to enjoy profits to which they are not entitled.</i></blockquote>
Newsflash, guys, there is <i>no current way for HP and Palm to profit from this app</i>. This entire suit against them is <i>ridiculous</i>. If 3rd party sites are still offering it, go file spurious trademark lawsuits against them and then lose in court. HP did everything you asked and you're <i>still</i> suing them for an astounding $500 million, even though they didn't create the app or have anything to do with it. Meanwhile, you're making your client look like a chubby (get it?).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/10011321971/chubby-checker-sues-two-companies-500-million-over-wang-measuring-app-downloaded-84-times.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/10011321971/chubby-checker-sues-two-companies-500-million-over-wang-measuring-app-downloaded-84-times.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/10011321971/chubby-checker-sues-two-companies-500-million-over-wang-measuring-app-downloaded-84-times.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you-can't-make-this-stuff-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130214/10011321971</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:48:01 PST</pubDate>
<title>Steve Jobs Used Patents Like A Mob Boss: Threatened To Sue Palm Over Patents If It Poached Any Apple Employees</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130124/07465121778/steve-jobs-used-patents-like-mob-boss-threatened-to-sue-palm-over-patents-if-it-poached-any-apple-employees.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130124/07465121778/steve-jobs-used-patents-like-mob-boss-threatened-to-sue-palm-over-patents-if-it-poached-any-apple-employees.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's long been clear to us that, rather than acting as incentives to innovators, or serving an important function by disclosing details about innovation, patents are little more than weapons to be used <em>against</em> innovators.  We've highlighted numerous examples over the years, but recently-revealed emails between Steve Jobs and Ed Colligan (who was the CEO of Palm) highlight how Steve Jobs <a href="http://www.patentprogress.org/2013/01/23/patent-bully-steve-jobs-unethical-use-of-patents/" target="_blank">almost certainly illegally used patents as a weapon to threaten Palm</a> away from hiring Apple employees.  This all goes back to a DOJ investigation we wrote about years ago, concerning big Silicon Valley tech companies stupidly <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0051075120.shtml">agreeing</a> not to poach employees from each other.  Not only is that an unfair restraint of trade, but as we've noted repeatedly, the free flow of employees between tech companies has been shown fairly conclusively to be a big part of why <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071204/005038.shtml">Silicon Valley companies</a> tend to be so innovative.
<br /><br />
While the DOJ settled with the tech companies, workers at those companies filed a civil lawsuit against their employers. Those companies have been trying to keep certain communications sealed and unavailable to the public, but Judge Lucy Koh <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/23/us-apple-google-lawsuit-idUSBRE90M04Y20130123" target="_blank">rejected that request</a>, leading to the public filing of an amazing declaration from Colligan that <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/561593-121737673-colligan-affidavit.html" target="_blank">includes an email exchange</a> between Colligan and Jobs, highlighting how Jobs sought to use patents as a weapon. Jobs told Colligan that if Palm hired more Apple employes, Apple would sue Palm for patent infringement.  In the declaration, Colligan first explains how Jobs relayed the threat during a phone call:
<blockquote><i>
In August 2007, I received a call from Steve Jobs, the Chief Executive Officer of Apple. In the months before the call, several employees had moved between the two companies. On the call, Mr. Jobs expressed concern about employees being hired away from Apple by Palm. As a solution, Mr. Jobs proposed an arrangement between Palm and Apple by which neither company would hire the other's employees, including high tech employees. <b>Mr. Jobs also suggested that if Palm did not agree to such an arrangement, Palm could face lawsuits alleging infringement of Apple's many patents.</b>
<br /><br />
I did not agree to Mr. Jobs's proposal and responded by sending an email on 15 August 24, 2007
</i></blockquote>
The email exchange is worth reading.  Colligan makes a case for why it's silly to worry about employees changing companies, noting that every company wants to hire the best employees period, and that there's a big enough market for everyone.  He notes, correctly, that the proposed agreement is "not only wrong, it is likely illegal."  As he points out: "We can't dictate where someone will work nor should we try.  I can't deny people who elect to pursue their livelihood at Palm the right to do so simply because they now work for Apple, and I wouldn't want you to do that to current Palm employees.  We can both try to persuade them to stay but, at the end of hte day, it is their choice, and a choice we should respect."
<br /><br />
From there he discusses just how dumb the patent threats are, pointing out that suing over patents doesn't help anyone:
<blockquote><i>
Steve, we don't want to hurt Apple. As I said on the phone, Palm is

focused on building the best team in the industry, and we know there

is a lot of quality talent outside of Apple. On the other hand, this

is a small space, and it's inevitable that we will bump into each

other. Threatening Palm with a patent lawsuit in response to a

decision by one employee to leave Apple is just out of line. A

lawsuit would not serve either of our interests, and will not stop

employees from migrating between our companies. This is a very

exciting time for both of our companies, and the market is certainly

big enough for both of us. We should focus on our respective businesses and not create

unnecessary distractions.
</i></blockquote>
He follows it up by noting that any such lawsuit would just create a nuclear war situation, since Palm has its own patents, though he clearly notes that the only people this benefits are the lawyers:
<blockquote><i>
That said, I want to be clear that we are not intimidated by your threat.
Palm has a very robust portfolio of patents, having been in the

handheld and smartphone businesses since the early 90's. in addition,
Palm now owns the former Siemens mobile patent portfolio, most

recently held by BenQ Corporation. This mobile computing and

communications portfolio includes over 1500 patent assets, the

majority filed in Europe. If you choose the litigation route, we can

respond with our own claims based on these patent assets, but don't
think litigation is the answer. We will both just end up paying a lot of lawyers a lot of money.

</i></blockquote>
Entirely true.  And then Steve Jobs hits back, first mocking Palm by noting that Apple has a lot more money, so it doesn't mind throwing money away to lawyers on a bogus patent lawsuit as long as it hurts Palm, and then mocking the quality of Palm's patents that it acquired from BenQ:
<blockquote><i>
I'm sure you realize the asymmetry in the financial resources of our respective companies when you

say: "We will both just end up paying a lot of lawyers a lot of money."
<br /><br />
Just for the record, when Siemens sold their handset business to BenQ they didn't sell them their
essential patents but rather just gave them a license. The patents they did sell to BenQ are not that
great. We looked at them ourselves when they were for sale. I guess you guys felt differently and
bought them. We are not concerned about them at all. My advice is to take a look at our patent

portfolio before you make a final decision here.

</i></blockquote>
As Dan O'Connor notes in the Patent Progress blog post above, this is no different than a mob boss protection racket, using the patents to warn Palm not to hire any more Apple employees or (effectively) "someone might get hurt" -- with the patents standing in for the traditional baseball bat.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130124/07465121778/steve-jobs-used-patents-like-mob-boss-threatened-to-sue-palm-over-patents-if-it-poached-any-apple-employees.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130124/07465121778/steve-jobs-used-patents-like-mob-boss-threatened-to-sue-palm-over-patents-if-it-poached-any-apple-employees.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130124/07465121778/steve-jobs-used-patents-like-mob-boss-threatened-to-sue-palm-over-patents-if-it-poached-any-apple-employees.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>they're-weapons</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130124/07465121778</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:06:36 PDT</pubDate>
<title>That Didn't Take Long: Amazon Sued For Patent Infringement For New Kindle Fire Tablet</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111012/03322316320/that-didnt-take-long-amazon-sued-patent-infringement-new-kindle-fire-tablet.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111012/03322316320/that-didnt-take-long-amazon-sued-patent-infringement-new-kindle-fire-tablet.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The general rule continues to prove itself true: do anything interesting in the tech world, and you <i>will</i> get sued for patent infringement.  Just weeks after Amazon announced its new Kindle Fire tablet, <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20118548-38/amazons-kindle-fire-tablet-hit-by-patent-lawsuit/" target="_blank">the company has been sued for patent infringement</a> by well-known patent troll Smartphone Technologies, a subsidiary of patent trolling giant Acacia.  Just a few months ago we noted that Smartphone Technologies/Acacia was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110721/02264715188/acacia-buys-up-more-smartphone-apps-patents-watch-patent-thicket-get-worse.shtml">buying up</a> more smartphone related patents, as it looks to seriously cash in on anyone actually doing anything in the space.
<br /><br />
The patents in question:
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=ARMVAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=frontcover&#038;dq=6,956,562,&#038;hl=en&#038;ei=WmmVTvuCJs7XiAKhrc3CAg&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=book_result&#038;ct=result&#038;resnum=1&#038;ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA" target="_blank">6,956,562</a>: Method for controlling a handheld computer by entering commands onto a displayed feature of the handheld computer (originally a PalmSource patent)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=J1wLAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=frontcover&#038;dq=6466236&#038;hl=en&#038;ei=5POSTouNDYLl0QGfm_BH&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=book_result&#038;ct=result&#038;resnum=1&#038;ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA" target="_blank">6,466,236</a>: System and method for displaying and manipulating multiple calendars on a personal digital assistant (originally a Palm Inc. patent)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=hPAVAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=frontcover&#038;dq=6,950,645&#038;hl=en&#038;ei=N2uVTu-mN7DQiAKg_IjkDg&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=book_result&#038;ct=result&#038;resnum=1&#038;ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA" target="_blank">6,950,645</a>: Power-conserving intuitive device discovery technique in a bluetooth environment (originally a PalmSource patent)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=0Qi6AAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=frontcover&#038;dq=7,506,064&#038;hl=en&#038;ei=o2uVTsj1DpL-iQL3y-T2BA&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=book_result&#038;ct=result&#038;resnum=1&#038;ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA" target="_blank">7,506,064</a>: Handheld computer system that attempts to establish an alternative network link upon failing to establish a requested network link (another PalmSource patent).
</li><li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=0N6sAAAAEBAJ&#038;pg=PA1&#038;dq=RE40,459&#038;hl=en&#038;ei=JWyVTpbnKarViALi1fiEBQ&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=book_result&#038;ct=result&#038;resnum=1&#038;ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&#038;q=RE40%2C459&#038;f=false" target="_blank">RE40,459</a>: Method and apparatus for communicating information over low bandwidth communications networks (and, yet again, PalmSource)</li>
</ul>
So Palm may be dead and buried inside HP... but at least we know its patent legacy lives on in making products people want more expensive and less able to come to market.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111012/03322316320/that-didnt-take-long-amazon-sued-patent-infringement-new-kindle-fire-tablet.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111012/03322316320/that-didnt-take-long-amazon-sued-patent-infringement-new-kindle-fire-tablet.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111012/03322316320/that-didnt-take-long-amazon-sued-patent-infringement-new-kindle-fire-tablet.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>up-in-flames</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111012/03322316320</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 02:48:12 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Does HP Buying Palm Promise To Solve Any Problems?</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100428/1625019227.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100428/1625019227.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's been rumored for several weeks now that Palm was up for sale, with a number of different companies supposedly taking a look at it, but news has come through now that <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212503407087936.html?mod=WSJ_Deals_LeadStory">HP has picked it up for $1.2 billion</a>. Palm's business has been running downhill for a few years now; its worldwide market share has fallen from 3.5 percent in 2005 to 1.5 percent in 2009 -- despite the <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml">relatively warm welcome</a> its Pre device received. The Pre was the first Palm phone to run its latest operating system, WebOS, which was supposed to help the company compete in a revitalized and highly competitive marketplace against the likes of Android devices and the iPhone. But that hasn't yet happened. The Pre (and the following device, the Pixi) <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml">hasn't grabbed</a> significant market share, which compounds Palm's other problem: lack of a strong developer community for WebOS. That is actually sort of ironic, given that an older incarnation of Palm was probably better than anybody in the mobile space at cultivating a huge and loyal developer community, back in the days of Palm OS. So if scale and a lack of developers are the two biggest problems holding Palm back, does the HP deal actually do anything to help solve them? Maybe that's looking at the situation the wrong way: perhaps the point of this isn't for HP to fix Palm, but for Palm to bring something more to the table for HP. Like <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/28/hp-palm-deal-webos/">1,500 patents</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100428/1625019227.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100428/1625019227.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100428/1625019227.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>hey-at-least-it-was-cheap</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100428/1625019227</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 8 Apr 2010 02:30:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Bunch Of Companies Sued Over Encryption Patents</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100407/1004078912.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100407/1004078912.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Another day, another story of a company no one's heard of who seems to produce nothing but patents, filing <a href="http://www.techeye.net/business/the-world-and-its-dog-get-sued-over-encryption?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+techeye+" target="_blank">a lawsuit against a ton of companies</a> in East Texas (of course).  This one, sent in by the <a href="http://www.boredsysadmin.com">Bored SysAdmin</a>, involves a company called The Pacid Group, suing  Asus, Samsung, Sony, Sony Ericsson, Fujitsu, LG, Gigabyte, GBT, MSI, Motorola, Research in Motion, Nikon, Microsoft, Nintendo, HTC and Palm, claiming that they all violate two of its patents (<a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=zvMCAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,963,646" target="_blank">5,963,646</a> and <a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=Z-0DAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,049,612" target="_blank">6,049,612</a>) on encryption.  While it's often difficult to find <i>any</i> information on the no name companies who sue big companies for patent infringement, at least The Pacid Group <a href="http://www.pacid.com/index-2.html" target="_blank">has a website</a>, where it clearly shows the company's only products: patents.  
<br><br>
As we've seen in other <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090412/2110264466.shtml">similar</a> lawsuits, the company appears to think that pretty much every bit of modern technology violates its patents.  According to the lawsuit, all of the following types of products may violate these patents: laptops, mobile phones, printers, routers, digital cameras, Blu-ray disk players, gaming devices, wireless adapters and portable media players.  Now, sure, you could make the claim that all of these companies found these patents from a company no one had heard of, and decided to "copy" the idea into their product.  Or, the fact that this basic idea appears in so many places might lead you to conclude that <i>the idea was the natural progression of the technology</i> and <i>obvious to those skilled in the art</i>, and thus not deserving of a patent.  But that would make sense.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100407/1004078912.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100407/1004078912.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100407/1004078912.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>but-of-course</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100407/1004078912</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Nov 2009 07:22:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Time For Palm To Drop WebOS And Embrace Android</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It appears that Wall Street is <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20091102/palm-3/?mod=ATD_rss" target="_blank">giving up on Palm</a> after sales of the Pre have been massively disappointing, and Sprint (their only US partner) appears to be focusing more and more on HTC Android-powered phones these days.  At the same time, developers are recognizing that if they're creating mobile apps, they need to decide which platforms to work on, and the markets for the iPhone and Android smartphones look a <i>lot</i> more exciting.
<br /><br />
This is, in large part, due to poor planning on the part of Palm and Sprint.  First, Palm was way too slow in really <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml">opening up</a> its developer program.  By the time it finally got around to it, more and more Android phones were hitting the market, with much more of a marketing push.  Developers, given the choice, will go for the platform that actually has users.  That's why I still say it was a huge mistake for Palm and Sprint not to have figured out a way to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml">give away the Palm Pre for free</a>.  The thing that Pre needed more than anything else was market share.  With market  share it could attract developers and a loyal following.  Without that, Palm is dead and everyone knows it.  Having failed at that, and now thrown away its head start over the rush of Android-powered devices hitting the market, Palm is quickly looking like an afterthought, just months after the Pre was released.
<br /><br />
I actually stopped by a Sprint store earlier this week, because I was interested in seeing its recent Android-powered phones in person.  I played around with them, and then picked up the Palm Pre as well -- and I have to admit that the hardware on the Pre is really nice.  It's just a much nicer overall package than the HTC Hero (an Android-powered phone) -- more compact, had a more solid feel, and the slide out keyboard is actually quite nice (if a bit small).  But, after seeing all the developer support moving towards Android, I have no interest in betting on a dying OS.  And that's when I wondered why Palm didn't just release an Android-powered Pre as well.  I recognize that it's got a lot invested in webOS, but it's a sunk cost and a losing strategy.
<br /><br />
A few years back, after years supporting its own Palm operating system, the company started offering Treo's that supported Windows Mobile. It's time to do that again, but for Android, letting the company actually make use of a much larger, committed developer community, rather than trying to keep the whole thing in-house.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/0345006779.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-time-has-come</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091103/0345006779</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 Oct 2009 15:24:20 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Palm Finally Realizes It Needs To Help, Not Hinder Developers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've been getting on Palm lately for the widespread <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml">mistakes</a> the company made in building out a strong developer community.  Despite having had strong developer communities in the past, with the Pre, it seemed like Palm decided to simply copy everything (even all the bad things!) that Apple did with the iPhone app store.  It was a terrible case of iPhone cargo cultism, that seemed to assume that if they just copied the iPhone's every move with developers, things would be just like the iPhone.  Now that that's backfired, it looks like the company has come to its senses.  It's brought in some Mozilla developers and <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/05/palm-free-apps-for-the-web-free-development-for-open-source-and-free-pres/" target="_blank">opened things up wide</a>.  It's done away with the fee for developers.  It's openly allowing people to offer their apps directly to Palm users without having to go through an insane and arbitrary approval process.  And, the new folks promise this is just the beginning of a much more open offering.  It's about time.  This is the sort of thing that Palm should have done before it launched.
<br /><br />
In the meantime... there are still other problems showing up, including odd complaints about <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5374986/palm-doesnt-want-you-to-buy-too-many-apps" target="_new">hidden limits on how many apps you can get through the Pre app store</a>, without any clear response from Palm.  So, for every step forward...?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091006/0313456430.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>back-to-its-roots</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091006/0313456430</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 1 Oct 2009 00:54:05 PDT</pubDate>
<title>See, The Palm Pre Can Be Offered For Free</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A little over a month ago, I suggested that Sprint and Palm were making a big mistake in <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml">not offering the Palm Pre for free</a> (more specifically, saying that Sprint should subsidize the full price).  I don't think I can recall a post where more people told me I was so totally wrong.  People insisted it was the dumbest idea ever, and that it would harm the brand value of the Pre, while costing Sprint way too much money.  Yet, I still stand by that claim.  Sprint doesn't make money selling the phone, it makes it by getting people to sign up for at least two years of Palm Pre service -- which is on the higher end of the service scale.  The Pre is not as good as the iPhone, and did very little to really stand out from the competition.  So the way to get around that is to offer the device for free.
<br /><br />
At least some people seem to agree.
<br /><br />
The device is now being offered in the UK... <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2009/09/palm_pre_free_i.html;jsessionid=Q2VH2L4XDMBJRQE1GHOSKHWATMY32JVN?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_ALL" target="_new">exactly as I suggested: free with a two year contract</a>.  At the same time, through some tricky step following, you can actually <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5369147/palm-pre-how-to-get-it-free-after-rebate-and-cashback" target="_blank">get the device for free in the US as well</a>.  I don't see how that takes away from the prestige of the device at all.  If anything, it's only going to help make it easier for some people to at least try it out as a phone.
<br /><br />
Of course, my other big complaint with the Palm Pre -- its weak developer support still stands.  Famed developer Jamie Zawinski just wrote about his <a href="http://jwz.livejournal.com/1096401.html" target="_blank">absolutely ridiculous experience</a> trying to get two simple apps available on Palm Pre phones.  It's taken months, and they're still not available, even though he wants to make them available for free.  Instead, as with the iPhone, the "approval" process of getting apps into the app store are positively ridiculous.  I had been seriously considering getting a Palm Pre (in fact, a few months ago, I was positive I was going to get one), but without real developer support, it's just not worth it.  I'll wait until a decent Android phone is available instead.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0356006351.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>was-it-such-a-ridiculous-suggestion?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090929/0356006351</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:20:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Why Apple Should Let Other Devices Connect To iTunes</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0337136349.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0337136349.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've mentioned in the past how silly it is that Apple <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml">blocks</a> the Palm Pre and other devices from accessing iTunes.  Plenty of people responded, pointing out that Apple really makes its money on the hardware, and thus it makes no sense to allow other hardware products to connect to iTunes.  While I agree that Apple makes its money off the hardware, I still disagree that Apple should block others out.  In doing so, it makes me and many others <i>less</i> likely to purchase an Apple product, because I don't want to get trapped into Apple hardware.  I'd much rather a more open solution.
<br /><br />
Over at Slate, Farhad Manjoo has written up a wonderful explanation of <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2229856/" target="_new">why Apple should not just allow the Palm Pre and others to connect to iTunes</a>, but it should encourage it.  The whole thing is worth reading, but here's a snippet:
<blockquote><i>
I hope the company continues to search for ways to sync with iTunes, because the fight--silly as it seems--is important, and Palm is clearly in the right. Apple may have the USB-IF on its side, and it may also be protected by copyright law. But by blocking non-Apple devices from its music app, Apple is violating a more fundamental principle of computing--that unalike devices should be able to connect to one another freely. The principle underlies everything we take for granted in tech today: It's why the Internet, your home network, and the PC function at all. And it's why Palm should keep storming the iTunes fortress.
<br /><br />
I am not claiming that Palm has the legal right to hack into Apple's software, nor am I calling on any authorities to compel Apple to let Palm in; if the cat-and-mouse game turns into a courtroom brawl, it's very likely that Apple would win the fight. Instead, I'm calling on Apple to stand down. Even better: It should create a legal pathway for Palm and every other company to sync with iTunes. Why? The most obvious reason is that it's good for iTunes users. Nobody other than Apple benefits from locked-down software. Apple frequently extols the wonders of digital music--the convenience, the flexibility, the environmental friendliness. But how flexible can it be if you're allowed to sync your tunes only with devices made by a single company?
<br /><br />
What's more, the iTunes block is hypocritical. Like every other tech company, Apple has benefited enormously from the spirit of interconnectedness that pervades the tech industry. The iPod would have fizzled if Microsoft had blocked it from hooking up to Windows PCs. Or look at the iPhone--Apple is proud that it can sync with Outlook, Microsoft Exchange, Gmail, Yahoo, and just about everything else. Indeed, you could argue that Apple, once left for dead on the periphery of the tech industry, managed to come back only because it skillfully marketed Macs as the most promiscuous computers you could buy. 
</i></blockquote>
Indeed.  While it's unlikely that Apple will actually do this, it would be a smart move.  No one's buying Apple hardware <i>because</i> it syncs with iTunes.  They're buying it for many other reasons, and Apple can continue to compete on those.  Blocking the Pre and other devices from accessing iTunes is petty and unnecessary.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0337136349.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0337136349.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090929/0337136349.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>stop-complaining</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090929/0337136349</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 8 Sep 2009 17:02:33 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Sprint Offers Palm Pre For $100 For A Month, Maybe Two... Then, Oops, Not At All</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090908/1504336131.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090908/1504336131.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I recently explained why I thought Sprint made a rather large strategic marketing error in <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml">pricing the Palm Pre</a> at the equivalent price of an iPhone: $199 (after annoying mail-in rebate that turns many buyers off).  In fact, I argued why it would make a lot more sense to further subsidize the phone all the way to free, and make up the money on the backend with more subscriptions.  Given how heavily invested Sprint was in the Pre, and how pathetic the sales have been to date, it really makes very little sense to keep the price so high.  So, at the very least, I thought it was a good first step this morning when it was "announced" that Sprint was <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090908/new-from-sprint-the-99-palm-pre/" target="_new">offering the Pre at $99</a>.  Of course, there were some silly things about this promotion as well.  First, it only applied to new customers, transferring numbers over from other carriers.  What better way to mock your loyal customers than to offer others a better deal?  Second, they didn't just discount the phone, but gave you a "credit" that was split over the first three bills (better than a mail-in rebate, but still annoying).  However, what was even stranger was that Sprint didn't even seem to understand the promotion itself.  John Paczkowski noted that in some places on Sprint's website it said the promotion ran until October 10th.  In others it said October 31st.
<br /><br />
Apparently, the confusion at Sprint headquarters went well beyond that, because as the company attempted to sort out the confusion, it <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090908/sprint-cancels-palm-pre-100-offer/" target="_blank">announced that  it was doing away with the special promotion entirely</a>.  And yet, even after announcing it, the offer page remained on Sprint's site.  It's not at all clear what happened here, other than Sprint seems somewhat clueless in how to do basic promotions, pricing and marketing.  Obviously, the company intended to offer the phone for $99 -- it's on the company's own site.  And yet, now it's suddenly claiming that it was a mistake?  I can already see the business school case study on how <i>not</i> to launch an innovative smart phone.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090908/1504336131.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090908/1504336131.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090908/1504336131.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>great-moments-in-marketing</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090908/1504336131</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:52:38 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Why Sprint Should Be Giving Away The Palm Pre For Free</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There was plenty of hype around the launch of the Palm Pre, which by all accounts is a pretty damn good phone (I've played around with it, and like it).  However, Palm and Sprint made two huge mistakes in marketing it.  First, they didn't have a really well-developed developer community building apps for it, so the app store is pretty weak.  Apple did this with the iPhone when it launched (and we dinged them at the time as well), but Apple got away with it for two reasons: Apple is leading the field in such smartphones, and it's <i>Apple</i>, who seems able to bring developers to the table with cultish enthusiasm and loyalty.
<br /><br />
Palm doesn't quite have that.
<br /><br />
If the problem was that the SDK wasn't ready, Sprint and Palm should have waited.  Launching before the phone was really ready was a mistake, and the company may be paying for it with rather weak sales after an initial burst.  However, one analyst has a suggestion that I think makes a lot of sense, saying that Sprint <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090826/analyst-to-sprint-youd-sell-more-pres-if-they-cost-99-cents/?mod=ATD_rss" target="_new">should drop the price of the Palm Pre to $0.99</a>.  Basically, let Sprint subsidize more of the phone -- which it would easily make back in service fees (since the phone requires a two year contract with its most expensive data plan).  Pricing the phone at $199 makes it a direct comparison to the iPhone, and that's the <i>last</i> thing that Palm or Sprint should want.  But dropping the price to $1 (or, hell, give the damn phone away for <i>free</i> with a two year plan), would get it a lot of attention, and give people a <i>real</i> reason to switch away from other carriers or other phones, and give the Pre a shot.  Trying to compete with the iPhone by just saying "but we're better" doesn't work.  Rather than spending tons of money on <a href="http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/palm-pre-ad/" target="_blank">creepy TV commercials that make no sense</a>, why not use that ad budget to subsidize the phone in a way that really builds up a lot of attention and serious buyers?  If Sprint did that, I'd go sign up for a Palm Pre that very day.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090827/0404506022.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>just-get-that-sucker-out-there</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090827/0404506022</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:21:36 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Apple Does As Many Expected: Kills Palm Pre iTunes Syncing</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The pettiness of Apple continues... Last month, Apple <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml">warned</a> potential buyers of the Palm Pre that it might break that phone's ability to sync with iTunes.  It didn't take long for Apple to follow through.  In an upgrade to iTunes, which Apple claims was for "bug fix" but also to handle "verification" issues, <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=aa9qYxk4Kyf8" target="_new">it has blocked the Palm Pre from accessing iTunes</a>.  This is pure petty behavior on the part of Apple.  When the original statement was made, some assumed that Apple was really just saying that it couldn't be responsible <i>if</i> an update broke the syncing, not that it would purposely break that ability.  But Apple's comments suggest they cut off the Pre on purpose, noting that it wanted to stop devices that "falsely pretend" to be iPods or iPhones.
<br /><br />
The Palm Pre is a nice phone according to many people, but it's not making any serious dent in iPhone sales.  Blocking it out of iTunes is just silly.  I don't have a Palm Pre or an iPhone... but I do use iTunes.  But now that I know Apple is breaking software and removing features, I guess it's time to look elsewhere.  How's Songbird these days?  Other suggestions?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090715/1401055554.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>iPetty</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090715/1401055554</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:35:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Apple Warns Palm Pre Users: We're Going To Break Your iTunes Syncing</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I have to admit that I've never really understood Apple's ongoing efforts to block any sort of compatibility with both iPod devices and iTunes.  You may recall a few years back the big <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040729/0947249.shtml">fight</a> between Apple and RealNetworks when Real tried to let its software connect to iPods, which Apple treated as a gross injustice.  Now Palm is doing the opposite, by letting the Pre connect and sync with iTunes software by making the device <i>pretend</i> it's an iPod when connected to a computer.  Apple, however, has responded with a neat little message that never actually mentions Palm, even if it's entirely transparent who it's about, warning people that Apple <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090616/unsupported-third-party-digital-media-players-hmm-wonder-who-that-could-be/" target="_new">can easily break syncing when it updates its software</a>.  Of course, Apple did it in a way that it can claim wasn't meant nefariously at all.  All the company <i>really</i> meant was to make people understand that it has no control over how the Pre syncs with iTunes, and it's <i>possible</i> that an update could break that syncing.  Sure.  Right.  Except most people assume this means Apple <i>intends</i> to break it.
<br /><br />
But I don't understand why.  For people who bought the Palm Pre, that's only going to piss them off and drive them to use other software, taking them <i>away</i> from Apple's products.  Why does that help Apple?  Having Palm Pre syncing with iTunes increases the value of iTunes.  What's wrong with that, other than being the latest example of Apple's dislike of anyone doing anything not invented in Cupertino?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/0311145264.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>shot-across-the-bow</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090617/0311145264</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Jun 2009 08:33:35 PDT</pubDate>
<title>If Everyone Likes The Palm Pre, Why So Much Hedging?</title>
<dc:creator>Derek Kerton</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>The <a href="http://www.wirelessweek.com/article.aspx?id=169866">Palm Pre launches at Sprint this Saturday</a>, and you've probably been seeing an increasing <a href="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&#038;ie=UTF-8&#038;rlz=1T4TSHA_enUS313&#038;q=palm+pre">amount of buzz</a> on the subject [that is a Google search link, and today will show buzz, but if you're reading this later, will be meaningless]. I <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml">wrote about the Pre</a> on Techdirt after being very impressed with the phone at CES and MWC Barcelona. I wrote, &quot;I'm not sure when the bandwagon is going to hit the trail for this device, but I'm saddling up right now.&quot; And in the intervening months, I've noted that more and more reviewers were, like me, heaping <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5126702/palm-pre-preview-simply-amazing">praise</a> on the device. But there was something else: many reviewers <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/13/palm-pre-everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know/">couched</a> the <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/141365-preview-of-palm-s-pre-more-than-a-little-skeptical">endorsement</a> of the Pre with <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc2009062_915044.htm">caveats</a>. At the end of every glowing article was a conclusion that seemed out of sync with the review. Here were mine, &quot;I can't predict whether the developer community will rally around the Pre, or whether Sprint and Palm will be successful in selling big volumes, but I want to call this one early: the Pre is a great smartphone.&quot; Walt Mossberg at the WSJ wraps up <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124407239691783093.html">his glowing review</a> with, &quot;All in all, I believe the Pre is a smart, sophisticated product that will have particular appeal for those who want a physical keyboard. It is thoughtfully designed, works well and could give the iPhone and BlackBerry strong competition -- but only if it fixes its app store and can attract third-party developers.&quot;</p>
<p>The caveats were reasonable. Developers have limited resources, and collective uncertainty in Palm and Sprint performance has us hedging our bets.  Sure, we could assert that the device is great, but we could not be sure if the ecosystem would grow around it. But I think I'm in a better position to do that now. When 98 out of every 100 reviews say the device is great, isn't that one hell of a consensus? I haven't seen that kind of agreement in this industry since AFTER the launch of the iPhone. That's exactly the kind of community consensus that seeds an ecosystem. I officially retract my hedge. What content developer wouldn't be at least attracted to a device that gains such consistently high grades? Is it just hype?  No.  A landslide of positive reviews from people who actually tested isn't hype - it's straight As. That's good news for Palm, good news for consumers in that we get another competitive device to run alongside the iPhone, but only marginally good news for Sprint. Verizon took the wind out of Sprint's sales [sic] by announcing they, too would carry the Pre by year end, and AT&#038;T is rumored to want a GSM version.</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1806535135.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>I'm-Totally-Sure...Well,-Maybe</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090604/1806535135</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 17:28:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Dear Palm: The Last Thing You Want To Do Right Now Is Screw Over App Developers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090522/1534004987.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090522/1534004987.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The Palm Pre comes out in a few weeks, and many are hoping that this is finally the smartphone out there that can capably compare to the iPhone.  Of course, one key to that is having a devoted developer community that <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090519/1120184933.shtml">makes the device more valuable</a>.  Palm is betting the business on the Pre, and some of the early reports I'd heard from developers about its WebOS platform were that it was a <i>great</i> development environment.  Since I think it's good for the overall market to have strong competitors, I was hopeful that maybe the Pre would live up to the hype (to be honest, I'm thinking about getting one myself).  However, slimcat, points us to the story of overly legalistic Palm <a href="http://www.danrumney.co.uk/2009/05/21/predevcamp-palms-missed-opportunity/" target="_new">overreacting to a minor issue</a> and canceling a chance to work with the folks who were setting up PreDevCamp.  Now, Palm had no obligation to work with the folks setting it up, but it would be a good way to support the developer community.  So why did they bail out?  Apparently because one of the folks behind PreDevCamp mentioned on Twitter that he was meeting with Palm, but that he couldn't say anything since the meeting was under NDA.
<br><br>
Now, if you've been around larger companies for any length of time, you can see <i>why</i> this happened.  It's pretty standard that a meeting under NDA means that even the fact that the meeting exists is covered by the non-disclosure agreement.  So... I can understand (at first glance) how Palm reacted.  But, Palm really should have taken a step back and looked at the larger picture.  Having the guy reveal the meeting was hardly a big issue.  The bigger issue is helping developers feel as comfortable as possible developing for the Pre and making the device as valuable as possible.  Freaking out over a harmless "leak" about the meeting is missing the big picture in a way that only hurts Palm. <b>Update</b>: Looks like things are getting worked out with Palm <a href="http://pdnblog.palm.com/2009/05/a-predevcamp-update/" target="_new">apologizing</a> for overreacting and a nice <a href="http://blog.gallucci.net/2009/05/so-palm-got-it.html" target="_new">airing of differences</a> that seems to have worked well for both sides.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090522/1534004987.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090522/1534004987.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090522/1534004987.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bad,-bad-idea</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090522/1534004987</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:59:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Pre-Brief Of The Upcoming CTIA Conference</title>
<dc:creator>Derek Kerton</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">With the US mobile phone industry's leading conference kicking off in Las Vegas, I thought it might be fun to write a small &quot;pre-brief&quot; of the trends to expect from the show. This <a target=_top href="http://www.ctiawireless.com/">CTIA Show</a> comes close on the heels of the huge, Europe-based <a target=_top href="http://www.mobileworldcongress.com/">Mobile World Congress</a>, and I would have dropped a blog post from there...if my Netbook hadn't been stolen! Here's what to expect from the CTIA show:</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">App Stores</span>: What was innovative about Apple's App Store? It is a single point of sales, it's trusted, compatible, it offers tested apps, and it gives a large (70%) revenue share to the application developer. Nothing new there, but damn, what a success. Once again, Apple succeeded by (not doing anything revolutionary, but) using a simple recipe that makes sense and motivates all stakeholders. Sadly, a similar <a target=_top href="http://techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20020816/092442.shtml">'imode'</a> app store has been done by DoCoMo in Japan since 2000, but North American carrier imitations usually neglect being remotely 'open' and don't offer a large revenue share to developers. Turns out, this is fairly important if you want to stimulate a large, diverse offering of useful, high-quality applications. Anyway, all those companies that didn't copy imode are now copying Apple, so expect to see more news around Microsoft's store, RIM Blackberry's store, the Android store, and more. The trend is good, since it will get more money in developers' hands, and should help some phone owners find applications that make their devices more valuable.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Mobile Broadband/Embedded Broadband</span>: There will be lots of talk and probably a bunch of announcements about mobile broadband access at the show. I am referring specifically to the use of cellular broadband modems in devices that are not phones, such as <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/1145404308.shtml">Netbooks, Laptops</a>, cameras, readers, media players, etc. I am <a target=_top href="http://www.ctiawireless.com/attendees/educational_sessions.cfm?calID=820">moderating a panel</a> on this subject at the CTIA show, and I'm thrilled to be doing it, because it is such a major trend. The two driving forces to this trend are the 3G networks that are already in place, and carrier willingness to sell new kinds of service plans. Carriers have been somewhat stuck in a rut of thinking of mobile access as &quot;<a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20040423/182415.shtml">one phone, one contract, $60/mo.</a>&quot; But recently, their thinking has been changing, and the <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071120/181127.shtml">notion of wholesale businesses of selling connections to devices like Amazon's Kindle</a> is gaining steam. Expect to see more news of daily connection plans for laptops (like Wi-Fi Hotspots), and wireless data bundled in the price of other consumer electronics.&nbsp;</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Femtocells</span>: A femtocell is a small box that looks like a Wi-Fi router, and similarly plugs in at your home or small office. But instead or routing laptops to the Internet, a femtocell routes telephone calls from your mobile phone to your carrier. Put one of these in a home or office with poor cell reception, and instantly get four bars. That's good for you and the carrier, who gets to keep you as a customer. But what also benefits the carrier is that your phone's traffic is now carried over your broadband connection, saving their towers from having to allocate capacity to you. Sprint has it, T-Mobile uses a special variant, Verizon has recently launched it, and AT&#038;T is piloting these devices. I expect femtocells to successfully creep into the marketplace, and we'll hear a fair bit about femtocells at the show, but also other new ways of delivering cellular service like Distributed Antenna Systems, Repeaters, and such.</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Backhaul</span>: <a target=_top href="http://imcellular.org/2009/02/26/problem-data-traffic-growing-faster-than-revenues/">Wireless data use is taking off</a>. Driven by flat rates, popular and easy to use phones like iPhone, and supplemented by growing use of cellular modems to laptops and Netbooks, people are finally exchanging significant amounts of data traffic from cell towers. But these towers were initially put in place for highly compressed, narrowband voice traffic. As such, each tower was often connected by a meager T1 line. The connection that the towers have to the core network is called "backhaul," and yesterday's backhaul is woefully inadequate for tomorrow's data traffic loads. The short-term solution was to just add more T1s...but the costs of this rapidly become prohibitive. So the long-term solutions that will be discussed at length in Las Vegas are point-to-point microwave wireless relays, metro Ethernet, and fiber optic connections.</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">The Palm Pre</span>: I'm not sure when the bandwagon is going to hit the trail for <a target=_top href="http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/special-reports/palm-webos-mobile-ui-advances-2009">this device</a>, but I'm saddling up right now. <a target=_top href="http://www.kerton.com/papers/20060117.htm">I've been negative on Palm</a> for a while, but I saw the Pre at CES in January and was pleasantly surprised, but unfortunately didn't allocate much time to Palm. Subsequently, I spent some time with the Pre at MWC in February, and was very impressed. Of all the phones I have seen since the iPhone came out, this is the first one that I think may be better -- and <a target=_top href="http://www.kerton.com/papers/kertoncall_iphone.htm">I am very fond of the iPhone</a>. I use a very powerful HTC Windows phone, and when I see the Pre in action, I find myself repeatedly saying &quot;I wish my phone could do that.&quot; 'Synergy,' the Pre's ability to pull together your contacts, emails, calendars into one consolidated view, is a favorite element. But what really struck me was the User Interface, which is very visual, very touch, and very intuitive. I felt the same way I felt when I first saw the iPhone in action. The Pre is not an evolution of previous Palms. It is a new starting point, and like the iPhone, it seems devoid of classic silo thinking and lousy UI baggage. I can't predict whether the developer community will rally around the Pre, or whether Sprint and Palm will be successful in selling big volumes, but I want to call this one early: the Pre is a great smartphone.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">More iPhone &quot;killers&quot;</span>: We've seen handset vendors offer so-called iPhone Killers at every turn since June 2007. I have found almost every such claim to be unfounded over the past 2 years. I have written that a touch screen and square icons do not an iPhone Killer make. But quarter-by-quarter, the competitors' claims get more and more credible. While HTC, Nokia, RIM, Samsung, and LG make incremental progress to matching the iconic device, I think Palm has the real bomb to drop, if they manage to get the Pre to market on time.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Android</span>: The past year was almost devoid of Android handset announcements. <a target=_top href="http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/MWC-Vodafone-to-Offer-Google-Android-on-HTC-Magic/">Barcelona was strangely silent on that front</a>. In fact, we haven't heard much about new Android handhelds since the T-Mo G1 was announced early in 2008! But there's enough rumors floating around to suspect a batch of Android announcements this week. Let's wait and see.&nbsp;</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Google Voice</span>: Google <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/1711214100.shtml">recently announced their Google Voice</a> service, and it has created quite a stir in the industry. The fixed carriers have <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20050824/113418.shtml">long felt threatened by Google</a>, although the search giant had yet to fire a shot across the mobile carriers' bow. So long as it stayed in search, email, web VoIP, advertising, and location services, Google was only a thorn in the cellcos' side. But with the addition of Google Voice (GV), Google is now going straight at the heart of the carrier's core service. GV is essentially a disintermediation play, where users will use just one phone number, provided by Google, and can intelligently route and manage their phone calls to desk, cellphone, voicemail, email, etc., by using a web dashboard interface. By using a Google phone number, users needn't even tell anyone their cellular or landline numbers -- the carriers become pipes for the Google Voice customer. Expect to see and hear some responses, which have already started from other newcomers like <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20070522/113834.shtml">Skype</a>, or classic solution vendors like <a target=_top href="http://www.wirelessweek.com/article.aspx?id=167204">AlcaLu</a>.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Meet Huawei</span>: If you are not familiar with this company yet, better learn how to pronounce the name. Huawei is the leading example of the next generation of telecom infrastructure providers out of China. They have been selling competitive equipment for years, but carriers in Western countries have been reluctant to adopt their products based on a perceived quality gap with leading vendors like Ericsson, Nortel, Motorola, and Alcatel-Lucent. But the winds are shifting. Tougher economic times, paired with some successful Huawei reference cases in Leap Wireless, Cox cable, and Canadian telcos, prove that Huawei can compete on quality and price. Huawei is growing its presence in the US, recently opening offices here in Silicon Valley. Could a major US carrier deal be in the making?</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>Too-Soon-For-A-De-Brief</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090330/2030174313</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 3 Feb 2009 16:54:28 PST</pubDate>
<title>Analyst Says What We Already Knew: Apple's Multi-Touch Patent Fight Won't Help Its Business</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/1203253611.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/1203253611.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ After Palm showed off its new Pre smartphone, including the device's multitouch interface, at the Consumer Electronics Show last month, Apple made some <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml">threatening noises</a> about how it would go after anybody who "ripped off" its intellectual property. As always, we didn't see how this would benefit anybody in the marketplace, since competition pays benefits to consumers, and drives participants, even Apple, to continually innovate and improve their products. Now, a wireless industry analyst has <a href="http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20090202/WIRELESS/902029978/-1">called Apple's threats into question</a>. He makes the point that a long, drawn out IP fight won't help Apple's business in the long run: "Building on the company's legacy as one of the greatest innovators in the technology industry may be a smarter business model than taking on the rest of the industry in a battle that may be impossible to win." 
<br /><br />
His reasoning is twofold: first and most obviously, Apple stands to gain more by competing in the market than competing in the courts. Second, he says that if Apple went ahead with patent suits, it may not be able to win them. He says that it appears that much of Apple's multitouch IP portfolio is based on work from a couple of its employees -- who also were granted a number of multitouch patents while they were employed by the University of Delaware. The University holds those patents, while the analyst also found a lot of potential prior art he says could threaten the Apple patents' validity if they're reviewed. So if Apple realizes the patents may not stand up to a review, it could explain the bluster; but once it's clear the threats are empty, they hold no value. The question now seems to be how long Apple will try to play out the show, and how many resources it will throw at it that would be better spent on developing its products.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/1203253611.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/1203253611.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/1203253611.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>in-case-you-didn't-get-it-yet</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090202/1203253611</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 02:59:25 PST</pubDate>
<title>Apple Threatening Patent Lawsuits Over New Palm Pre</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ You may recall back when Apple first announced the iPhone, Steve Jobs proudly talked up how the company had <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070111/005550.shtml">over 200 patents</a> on the various technologies in the phone.  We wondered whether the company really needed those patents.  After all, most of the "new" technologies in the iPhone weren't really new at all.  The compelling part of the iPhone was that it was put together in a nice (relatively inexpensive) package, and designed so well that people wanted it.  The massive success of the iPhone since then has highlighted that fact.  It had nothing to do with patents, and everything to do with designing a phone that many people wanted.  And, of course, the patents did absolutely nothing to stop <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081124/1601102936.shtml">patent infringement lawsuits</a> from being filed against the company.  However, Apple had resisted using those particular patents against anyone else... but that may be changing.
<br /><br />
On the latest earnings call, when asked about the new Palm Pre phone, which is getting fantastic reviews for actually doing a bunch of things better than the iPhone, Apple's Tim Cook made it clear that the company was <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090121/apple-coo-we-will-not-stand-for-having-our-ip-ripped-off/" target="_new">examining patent lawsuits against Palm</a>:
<blockquote><i>
We like competition--as long as our competitors don't rip off our IP.  And we're going to go after anyone who does. I'm not talking about any particular company, but we are ready to suit up and go against anyone. We will not stand for having our IP ripped off, and we will use every weapon at our disposal....
</i></blockquote>
In other words, Apple doesn't really like competition -- at least not competition that improves upon an idea before Apple is able to do so.  Once again, we're seeing the problem of patents and left wondering where the benefits are.  Having a strong competitor to the iPhone in the market will drive everyone to more rapidly innovate and improve on the offering -- and that's only going to be good for everyone.  More innovation will drive more revenue while making happier customers.  Using patent lawsuits to take a strong competitor out of the market (or distract them with court time and costs) is about tearing down innovation, rather than encouraging it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ugh</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090121/1932143481</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:54:05 PST</pubDate>
<title>Palm Centro Hits Market Sweet Spot; Making Smartphones Affordable</title>
<dc:creator>Derek Kerton</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080219/111406294.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080219/111406294.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've been down on Palm Inc. for some time now, as well as its tired OS. Just see any of the <a href=" http://www.techdirt.com/search.php?site=&#038;q=palm">recent stories</a> we've written here on the subject. Palm, its handheld computers and its OS were once the darlings of the IT world, and universally loved by almost all users. Palm devices performed a few tasks very well in an era where that was cutting edge. Unfortunately, as times moved forward, Palm's OS did not, and today it performs too few tasks, and performs them <a href="http://www.kertongroup.com/papers/20060117.htm">not that well</a>. But despite our normal criticisms, this post is about how great the <a href="http://www.wirelessweek.com/ATT-Offer-Palm-Centro.aspx">release of the Palm Centro in Europe and on AT&#038;T</a> is for the market. Given the still-tired OS don't expect cutting edge data applications: the main winning feature of this device is the $100 price tag. That's important because not every smartphone wannabe-user is ready to deal out the $400 for the entry-level iPhone, and the Centro addresses the millions of potential smartphone buyers that fall below Microsoft's, RIM's, Nokia N and E series' and Apple's price points. Some of these consumers still want a keyboard, a PIM, e-mail service, a browser, and such, but with a lower budget. Centro will offer that, and will be joined by other future cheap smartphones with Symbian, Android, and other Linux derivatives. By the end of 2008, anyone who wants a smartphone will be able to have one (whether or not it's from Palm), and that's a big deal.
<br /><br />
An interesting upshot of all this is that, as smartphones start becoming highly affordable, and anyone interested in owning one will do so, that group will also represent just about anybody interested in the mobile Internet and data services. If all these subscribers have devices that enable sideloading and direct installation of third party apps, the "walled garden" strategy will be increasingly futile. Carriers can still have the "carrier deck", and many customers will use it for convenience, but it will have to compete with off-deck solutions.  It's about time.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080219/111406294.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080219/111406294.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080219/111406294.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>not-dead-yet</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080219/111406294</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:08:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Palm Realizes It's Not Apple; Closes Retail Shops</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080125/01233368.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080125/01233368.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Over the last decade, plenty of technology hardware companies thought it would make sense to open their own retail shops.  Sony, Gateway, Palm and Apple all went down that path.  Of that list, only Apple has been able to turn those retail stores into something valuable.  Gateway was the first, but its retail effort <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040401/1728202.shtml">failed miserably</a>.  Sony's retail effort was always based more on the idea that the stores are <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040331/101254.shtml">not</a> there to sell products, but just to display them.  Sony has always admitted that the stores were more about brand and product awareness than sales -- but that's partly because it doesn't want to piss off its channel, so it prices everything quite high in its own stores.  Apple doesn't have that problem, as it has total control over its distribution channel and retail pricing.  Of course, the difference here is that Apple's stores and products are designed so people actually <i>want</i> them.
<br /><br />
And then there's Palm.  Palm used to always be compared to Apple, back in the day.  But, that was back in the day when Apple was a struggling computer company.  Since Steve Jobs reinvented Apple as being cool again, those comparisons sort of disappeared.  Its own <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040507/1223202.shtml">retail strategy</a> was clearly an attempt to copy Apple, but without the cool products (or the cool store design) it never did anything useful for the company.  About the only surprise coming out of Palm's decision to <a href="http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9857696-37.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_new">shut down its retail stores</a> is that it took this long to decide to pull the plug.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080125/01233368.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080125/01233368.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080125/01233368.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>so-much-for-that-plan</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080125/01233368</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 8 Nov 2007 12:14:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>NTP's Latest Patent Shakedown Must Wait For USPTO; Why Wasn't RIM Given The Same Consideration?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Even if you just have a passing interest in the topic of patents, you've probably heard of the RIM-NTP case.  That's where NTP, a company that ended up with some excessively broad and obvious patents after the inventor was unable to build a product anyone actually wanted to buy, sued RIM, the makers of the wildly successful Blackberry device, claiming patent infringement.  The attention the case got caused the US Patent Office to look closely at the patents, and very publicly state that it was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20060222/1155242.shtml">rejecting</a> NTP's patents, as they never should have been issued in the first place.  However, rather than waiting for the official patent review process to work itself out, the judge in the case pressured the two sides to settle, forcing RIM to cough up <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060303/1446243.shtml">$612.5 million</a> for no good reason.  It never made sense that the judge refused to wait for the Patent Office to finish its review -- especially since the office had been so public in questioning the validity of the patents.
<br /><br />
NTP took its winnings and immediately started looking for others to sue while the patents were still valid.  It started with Palm, makers of the Treo.  However, in that case, the judge realized what was going on and put the case on <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070323/104855.shtml">hold</a> until the USPTO could make a final decision on the validity of the patents.  Not willing to standstill, NTP <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml">sued</a> all the national US mobile operators (Sprint, Verizon Wireless, AT&#038;T  and T-Mobile) for selling devices like the Blackberry and the Treo.  Once again, though, it looks as though a judge realizes that it's ridiculous for such a case to go forward when the USPTO has expressed so much skepticism towards the patents.  <a href="http://www.againstmonopoly.org/index.php?perm=381">Against Monopoly</a> lets us know that the judge for the Sprint, Verizon and AT&#038;T case has also <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501881.html">put the case on hold</a> until the USPTO is done.  What no one wants to explain, however, is why RIM wasn't afforded the same opportunity?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>innovation-at-work</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071107/014547</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:57:05 PDT</pubDate>
<title>NTP's Back, And It's Brought More Lawsuits</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Everybody's favorite patent troll, NTP, is back. It, of course, was the company that managed to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060303/1446243.shtml">wring $612.5 million out of RIM</a>, maker of the BlackBerry, for patent infringement -- despite the patents in question being <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060222/1155242.shtml">on their way</a> to being rejected by the USPTO after a bunch of prior art <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060417/0324230.shtml">came to light</a>. NTP has now <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070911.IBNTP11/TPStory/Business">sued AT&#038;T, Verizon and Sprint</a>, as well <a href="http://www.edn.com/article/CA6477576.html">as T-Mobile</a>, for infringing on the same patents. RIM's settlement with NTP was widely believed to protect its carrier customers from infringement suits, but it's likely such protection extended only to their use of RIM products, not other mobile email systems. It's not too surprising that NTP sued, since it's a patent troll and that's what they do, though it's slightly curious since the suits were filed in the same Virginia court, with the same judge, as its previous cases. This includes its earlier suit against Palm, which the judge <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070323/104855.shtml">put on hold</a> until after the validity of NTP's patents is finally assessed. It's likely the same thing will happen here, but NTP probably doesn't care too much -- it's just looking for more leverage to wring undeserved settlements and licensing deals out of anybody it can.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>oh-you-again?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20070911/162434</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Sep 2007 15:29:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Palm Figures Out A Way To Spare The Foleo From A Poor Launch Reception -- Kill It Off Beforehand</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070904/142654.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070904/142654.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Palm tried its best to whip up a ton of hype around the Foleo, the "smartphone companion" it announced at the end of May. Unfortunately for the company, the reaction was <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070530/111236.shtml">overwhelmingly negative</a>. The device itself seemed fairly pointless, and its main function seemed to be to highlight the poor user experience of the aging Palm OS platform on its Treo smartphones. Well, Palm's gone and saved itself from having to deal with the terrible reaction the Foleo was pretty certain to get when it hit the market -- <a href="http://blog.palm.com/palm/2007/09/a-message-to-pa.html">by canceling the device completely</a> (via <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/04/palm-kills-the-foleo-dead/">Engadget</a>). The blog post from Palm's CEO says the decision was made so that the company would only have one internal software platform, in addition to Windows Mobile, and that it plans a "Foleo II" when that internal platform is ready (if ever, since the platform in question's been talked about since <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20041208/101232.shtml">2004 or so</a>). Killing the device is a pretty extreme course of action, particularly if the Foleo was, as the Palm announcement claims, "nearly at the point for shipping." If that were true, the company had almost certainly begun manufacturing them already, but given Palm's track record for <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20060907/121302.shtml">moving very slowly</a> on the product front, it seems more likely that the Foleo was fatally flawed. There were rumors several days ago that the Foleo <a href="http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/08/22/palm-sub-laptop-foleo-delayed-says-deutsche-does-anyone-care/">had been delayed</a> because of software bugs, including a pretty significant one that kept the device from syncing with Treo smartphones -- giving further credence to the theory that this decision was taken because the device was screwy and destined for failure, rather than as a matter of platform strategy. If that is indeed the case, it merely raises <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070705/181956.shtml">further questions</a> about Palm and its viability.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070904/142654.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070904/142654.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070904/142654.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>how-to-avoid-failure</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20070904/142654</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:48:05 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Taiwanese Contract Manufacturers Set Sights On Brand-Name Prize</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070717/174118.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070717/174118.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Despite manufacturing plenty of the most recognizable electronics products in the world, and making plenty of money, the names of most Taiwanese contract manufacturers aren't familiar to consumers. For instance, Hon Hai Precision Industry generated revenues of more than $26 billion last year by making products for Apple, Dell, HP and other companies. But the Taiwanese firms are increasingly trying to leverage their experience and expertise by <a href="http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=viewThis&#038;etMailToID=1575621381">establishing their own consumer brands</a> and using them to boost their product margins. Contract manufacturing is a low-margin, volume based business: for instance, one analyst says contract manufacturers of laptops have 3-5% margins; compare that to the 40% or more Apple enjoys on iPods. But growing the brands can be a tricky proposition, and not just because the companies are looking to enter new and unfamiliar consumer markets. The problem is that these companies are looking to become competitors to their biggest customers: for instance High Tech Computer, which makes mobile phones for a variety of companies, is building up its HTC consumer brand, and competing with clients like HP and Palm in the process. Some are trying to get around this by splitting off their consumer operations from their contract-manufacturing businesses, such as Acer did successfully several years ago. Still, that's not the only obstacle. Getting the consumer marketing right remains a big issue -- particularly when the new consumer brands are competing against companies for which marketing, not manufacturing, is a specialty.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070717/174118.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070717/174118.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070717/174118.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>store-brand-soda</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20070717/174118</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>