<?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;rim&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:09:35 PST</pubDate>
<title>Phone No One Uses Will No Longer Carry Game No One Plays</title>
<dc:creator>Dealbreaker</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130131/16551121846/phone-no-one-uses-will-no-longer-carry-game-no-one-plays.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130131/16551121846/phone-no-one-uses-will-no-longer-carry-game-no-one-plays.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <div style="text-align:center;padding:7px 7px 3px 7px;margin:0 0 7px 15px;border:2px solid #bbb;float:right;line-height:1.2;">
<i style="font-weight:bold;color:#666;font-size:90%;">Cross-posted from</i><br />
<a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/01/h-p-wasnt-going-to-let-a-little-fraud-stand-in-the-way-of-acquiring-autonomy/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/vrrj9mY.png" width="120" title="Dealbreaker" style="margin:0;" /></a>
</div>
New versions of the BlackBerry mobile device won&#8217;t come equipped with BrickBreaker, a simple game that for years was installed on every BlackBerry and at its peak developed a cult following among traders and Wall Street executives. Richard S. Fuld, the former Lehman Brothers chief executive, became so addicted that in 2006 he had his technology department remove the game from his device in an effort to break his habit. Nick Manning, a spokesman for BlackBerry, on Wednesday confirmed the company&#8217;s decision to remove the game from new devices. [<a href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/wall-street-prepares-to-crack-brickbreaker-habit/">Dealbook</a>]
<br /><br />
<b>Other posts from <a href="http://dealbreaker.com/" target="_blank">Dealbreaker</a>:</b>
<ul><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/01/super-bowl-xlvii-everybody-wins/">Super Bowl XLVII: Everybody Wins</a>
</li><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/01/twinkies-predictably-worth-almost-as-much-as-hostess-itself/" target="_blank">Twinkies Predictably Worth Almost As Much As Hostess Itself</a>
</li><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/01/informants-assistance-on-insider-trading-case-slightly-undone-by-telling-series-of-lies-to-government/" target="_blank">Informant's Assistance On Insider Trading Case Slightly Undone By Telling &#8220;Series&#8221; Of Lies To Government</a>
</li></ul><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130131/16551121846/phone-no-one-uses-will-no-longer-carry-game-no-one-plays.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130131/16551121846/phone-no-one-uses-will-no-longer-carry-game-no-one-plays.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130131/16551121846/phone-no-one-uses-will-no-longer-carry-game-no-one-plays.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>but-what-about-those-angry-birds</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130131/16551121846</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 9 Aug 2012 02:25:58 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Judge Overturns $147.2 Million Jury Award Against RIM</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120809/00552119970/judge-overturns-1472-million-jury-award-against-rim.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120809/00552119970/judge-overturns-1472-million-jury-award-against-rim.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Just a few weeks ago, we wrote about RIM getting hit with <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml">yet another</a> crazy patent infringement award, after a jury sided with Mformation and told RIM to pay $147.2 million.  However, as often happens in these kinds of cases, RIM then sought a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) -- effectively a finding from the judge that, even though a jury ruled one way, it did not have enough evidence to do so.  Those aren't often granted, but in this case... <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/verdict-overturned-in-favor-of-research-in-motion-in-mformation-patent-case-2012-08-09" target="_blank">the judge dumped the jury verdict</a>.
<blockquote><i>
After considering motions presented by both parties, as well as the jury verdict (which was announced by RIM on July 14, 2012), the Judge determined that RIM had not infringed on Mformation's patent. In granting RIM's motion, the Judge also vacated the $147.2 million jury award, which means that RIM is not required to make any payment to Mformation.
</i></blockquote>
Mformation can (and almost certainly will) appeal, though a successful appeal would just take things back to square one, meaning a new district court trial.
<br /><br />
Stories like this are why there have been some efforts made to get juries out of patent trials...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120809/00552119970/judge-overturns-1472-million-jury-award-against-rim.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120809/00552119970/judge-overturns-1472-million-jury-award-against-rim.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120809/00552119970/judge-overturns-1472-million-jury-award-against-rim.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>there-it-goes</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120809/00552119970</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 3 Aug 2012 14:25:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Desperate RIM Gives In And Lets Indian Gov't Spy On Blackberry Communications</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120803/04004219923/desperate-rim-gives-lets-indian-govt-spy-blackberry-communications.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120803/04004219923/desperate-rim-gives-lets-indian-govt-spy-blackberry-communications.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Back in 2008, we wrote about how the Indian government was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/013805527.shtml">demanding</a> that RIM let it snoop on encrypted messages from Blackberry users.  RIM's response was that it was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080527/0112411225.shtml">simply impossible</a> to snoop on its enterprise customers' messages, since they set their own encryption keys.  A few months later, the government <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/0200222339.shtml">claimed</a> to have cracked RIM's encryption, though the whole claim was sketchy.  In 2010, the government <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml">again</a> demanded the right to spy on Blackberry users (raising more questions about that encryption cracking claim).  RIM apparently offered up a "solution" that the Indian government <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml">rejected</a>, because it didn't let them snoop enough (basically it allowed snooping on consumers, but not corporate accounts).
<br /><br />
Now, however, there are reports that RIM has come up with a "solution" to let the Indian government <a href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-02/news/33001399_1_blackberry-enterprise-encryption-keys-corporate-emails" target="_blank">spy on enterprise users as well</a>:
<blockquote><i>
RIM recently demonstrated a solution developed by a firm called Verint that can intercept messages and emails exchanged between BlackBerry handsets, and make these encrypted communications available in a readable format to Indian security agencies, according to an exchange of communications between the Canadian company and the Indian government.
</i></blockquote>
If you're a RIM Blackberry customer, and you bought into it because of the security features, now would be the point where you get pretty pissed off and start seeking alternatives.  The report from the Economic Times suggests RIM did this because of the "importance" of the Indian market.  RIM is clearly in trouble.  Its failure to keep up on the innovation front means that the company is clearly struggling.  But kowtowing to a government by allowing it to spy on users is hardly the sort of thing that's likely to get you more customers.  It seems like it should do exactly the opposite.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120803/04004219923/desperate-rim-gives-lets-indian-govt-spy-blackberry-communications.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120803/04004219923/desperate-rim-gives-lets-indian-govt-spy-blackberry-communications.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120803/04004219923/desperate-rim-gives-lets-indian-govt-spy-blackberry-communications.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>impossible-doesn't-mean-what-it-used-to</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120803/04004219923</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 03:03:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>RIM Loses Another Patent Case, Told To Pay $147.2 Million</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Perhaps one of the most famous patent lawsuits -- which really highlighted the whole patent troll problem -- was the case of NTP vs. RIM, which ended with RIM paying <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060303/1446243.shtml">over $600 million</a> to settle the case, even as the USPTO was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060222/1155242.shtml">rejecting</a> NTP's patents.  Since then, RIM has been involved in a number of other patent lawsuits as well, including one that <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2407145,00.asp" target="_blank">it lost last week against "Mformation Technologies."</a>  RIM has been told to pay up another $147.2 million in this case.
<br /><br />
Of course, what some people forget is that RIM brought much of this on itself.  Before NTP even came on the scene, it was <i>RIM</i> who <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20020919/090102.shtml">started suing</a> a bunch of other companies for patent infringement, based on its broad portfolio of patents around wireless email and mobile devices.  On top of all that, RIM's business is collapsing.  The company is <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/07/14/rim-patent-lawsuit-loss.html" target="_blank">fighting for relevancy</a> as its latest operating system has been delayed -- and there's growing evidence that even once it comes out, <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/canadarealtime/2012/07/13/rim-objects-to-survey-showing-weak-blackberry-developer-outlook/" target="_blank">no one's going to care about it</a>.  
<br /><br />
RIM can try to <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/15/rim-ceo-thorsten-heins-we-will-continue-to-make-the-people-that-use-a-blackberry-successful/" target="_blank">put a nice spin on things</a>, but it seems clear that the company is in serious trouble.  Perhaps, next time, it will focus on improving its products more than getting caught up in the patent game.  Yes, many of these more recent lawsuits came from it getting sued, but there's no doubt that RIM drew a lot of attention to itself early on with its own patent lawsuits against others.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120715/15122919703/rim-loses-another-patent-case-told-to-pay-1472-million.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>live-by-the-patent,-die-by-the-patent</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120715/15122919703</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 08:05:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Apple And Microsoft Behind Patent Troll Armed With Thousands Of Nortel Patents</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/13194719006/apple-microsoft-behind-patent-troll-armed-with-thousands-nortel-patents.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/13194719006/apple-microsoft-behind-patent-troll-armed-with-thousands-nortel-patents.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ You may recall last summer that Apple, Microsoft, EMC, RIM, Ericsson and Sony all teamed up to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml">buy Nortel's patents</a> for $4.5 billion.  They beat out a team of Google and Intel who bid <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110701/23392814939/google-tried-bidding-geeky-numbers-nortel-patents-how-about-314159-billion.shtml">a bit less</a>.  While there was some antitrust scrutiny over the deal, it was dropped and the purchase went through.  Apparently, the new owners picked off a bunch of patents to transfer to themselves... and then all (minus EMC, who, one hopes, was horrified by the plans) decided to <a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/05/rockstar/all/1" target="_blank">support a massive new patent troll</a> armed with the remaining <i>4,000</i> patents.  The company is called Rockstar Consortium, and it's run by the folks who used to run Nortel's patent licensing program anyway -- but now employs people whose job it is to just find other companies to threaten:
<blockquote><i>
But Widdowson is a specialist. He's one of 10 reverse-engineers working full time for a stealthy company funded by some of the biggest names in technology: Apple, Microsoft, Research In Motion, Sony, and Ericsson. Called the Rockstar Consortium, the 32-person outfit has a single-minded mission: It examines successful products, like routers and smartphones, and it tries to find proof that these products infringe on a portfolio of over 4,000 technology patents once owned by one of the world's largest telecommunications companies.
<br /><br />
When a Rockstar engineer uncovers evidence of infringement, the company documents it, contacts the manufacturer, and demands licensing fees for the patents in question. The demand is backed by the implicit threat of a patent lawsuit in federal court. Eight of the company's staff are lawyers. In the last two months, Rockstar has started negotiations with as many as 100 potential licensees. And with control of a patent portfolio covering core wireless communications technologies such as LTE (Long Term Evolution) and 3G, there is literally no end in sight.
</i></blockquote>
The article admits that Nortel got most of these patents because it wanted them for "defensive" reasons.  And now look at how they're being used.  Remember that the next time you hear a company promise to only use its patents defensively.  There's also a ridiculous quote from Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi:
<blockquote><i>
&#8220;A lot of people are still surprised to see the quality and the diversity of the IP that was in Nortel,&#8221; he says. &#8220;And the fundamental question comes back: &#8216;How the hell did you guys go bankrupt? Why weren&#8217;t you Google? Why weren&#8217;t you Facebook? Why weren&#8217;t you all these things, because you guys actually had the ideas for these business models before they did?&#8217;"
</i></blockquote>
The real answer, of course, is because patents are meaningless.  Ideas are worth nothing by themselves.  Ideas only matter if you execute, and anyone who's ever actually executed on an idea will tell you that the original idea almost is never reflected in the final product.  The process of going from idea to actual product is a process by which you learn that what matters is not what you thought mattered.  And yet, for reasons that make no sense to anyone who has ever actually built a product, creating monopolies around the ideas only serves to create a massive tollbooth towards actual innovation.  And that's what we have here -- and it's funded by Apple and Microsoft.
<br /><br />
Once again, we see that these two large companies are using the patent system not to innovate, but to stop up and coming competitors from innovating.  The patent system isn't being used to encourage innovation but to protect incumbents from an open market.
<br /><br />
Oh, and worst of all, the reason that the antitrust effort was dropped was because Apple and Microsoft promised to license the key patents under "reasonable terms."  But... Rockstar is not subject to that agreement.
<blockquote><i>
But the new company &#8212; Rockstar Consortium &#8212; isn&#8217;t bound by the promises that its member companies made, according to Veschi. &#8220;We are separate,&#8221; he says. &#8220;That does not apply to us.&#8221;
</i></blockquote>
That seems quite problematic, and perhaps worthwhile for the government to reopen its investigation...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/13194719006/apple-microsoft-behind-patent-troll-armed-with-thousands-nortel-patents.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/13194719006/apple-microsoft-behind-patent-troll-armed-with-thousands-nortel-patents.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/13194719006/apple-microsoft-behind-patent-troll-armed-with-thousands-nortel-patents.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>just-great...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120521/13194719006</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 22:01:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>ITC Rejects Key Kodak Patent As Invalid</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120522/04084919013/itc-rejects-key-kodak-patent-as-invalid.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120522/04084919013/itc-rejects-key-kodak-patent-as-invalid.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A couple years ago, a massively struggling Kodak decided that perhaps it could cash in by <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1233017760.shtml">suing</a> more innovative companies for patent infringement.  It filed suits against Apple and RIM for patent infringement both in the courts and using the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080702/1117121576.shtml">ITC loophole</a>.  It appears that going to the ITC may have been a mistake on Kodak's part, as the administrative law judge there has <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/255961/judge_deems_kodak_digital_camera_patent_invalid.html" target="_blank">said that the patent is invalid</a>, so it doesn't even matter that some iPhones and Blackberries technically infringe.   Of course, this has to hurt even more, considering that Kodak's trying to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120104/11593617280/kodak-planning-to-file-bankruptcy-order-to-sell-off-its-patents.shtml">sell off its patents</a>.  If one of the key ones is found to be invalid, that can't be helpful in selling the bundle...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120522/04084919013/itc-rejects-key-kodak-patent-as-invalid.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120522/04084919013/itc-rejects-key-kodak-patent-as-invalid.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120522/04084919013/itc-rejects-key-kodak-patent-as-invalid.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bye-bye</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120522/04084919013</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 8 May 2012 22:30:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>SGI Back From The Dead (Again) And Suing Tons Of Companies For Patent Infringement</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/02113518553/sgi-back-dead-again-suing-tons-companies-patent-infringement.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/02113518553/sgi-back-dead-again-suing-tons-companies-patent-infringement.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Back when I moved to Silicon Valley, Silicon Graphics Inc., (SGI) was still a hot place to work.  They were still pumping out cool machines and had a reputation for a fun corporate culture.  Of course, that collapsed pretty quickly over the next few years, as SGI totally misjudged the market trends and fell victim to the innovator's dilemma.  Basically, SGI never could come to terms with the fact that its premium products were going to be increasingly undercut as cheaper commodity technology improved.  Back in 2006, we noted that what remained of SGI had indicated that it planned to resurrect the company by <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061024/174559.shtml">going patent troll</a>.  However, we <i>thought</i> we'd avoided that ignoble result when SGI <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090401/1502474343.shtml">sold most of its assets</a> to Rackable for a mere $25 million three years ago.  Silly us for assuming those patents would just go away.
<br /><br />
While Rackable changed its name to Silicon Graphics International... the original company actually <i>retained</i> the patents, and renamed itself Graphics Properties Holdings... and over the last few years has <a href="http://www.m-cam.com/patently-obvious/hand-grave-intellectual-property-analysis-graphics-properties-holdings" target="_blank">been suing lots of companies for patent infringement</a>.  In the last year alone it has sued Apple, HTC, LG, RIM, Samsung, Sony, Acer, ASUS, Panasonic, Sharp, Toshiba, Vizio and Motorola Mobility.
<br /><br />
As the link above notes, while some of GPH's patents are relatively early, it appears that lots of similar inventions predated key patents.  However, the early date may make those patents look stronger, and give GPH much more leverage in getting companies to pay up -- or risk losing the ability to produce devices with nice graphics capabilities.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/02113518553/sgi-back-dead-again-suing-tons-companies-patent-infringement.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/02113518553/sgi-back-dead-again-suing-tons-companies-patent-infringement.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/02113518553/sgi-back-dead-again-suing-tons-companies-patent-infringement.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>troll-troll-troll-troll</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120419/02113518553</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2012 00:34:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Will RIM Go Full-On Patent Troll?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/13542518617/will-rim-go-full-on-patent-troll.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/13542518617/will-rim-go-full-on-patent-troll.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ RIM was the defendant in one of the most well known patent troll lawsuits of all time -- the fight against NTP, a company that claimed to have more or less invented wireless email.  In the end, even though the USPTO had problems with the patents, RIM ended up settling for $612 million.  What most people don't remember, however, is that one of the reasons that RIM got sued in the first place was that the guy behind NTP read an article in the newspaper about RIM suing tons of competitors over its own patents.  The company hasn't seemed quite as aggressive about its patents since then -- but perhaps that's going to change.  Reuters is reporting that, as RIM has been struggling to compete in the marketplace, it's hired a law firm to help it <a href="http://www.reuters.com/www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/21/us-rim-idUSBRE83K03C20120421" target="_blank">consider more options</a> and it appears that getting more money from its patents is one of the options being explored.  Considering just how "valuable" patents have become lately due to ridiculous disputes and awards, this isn't surprising.  But it's pretty sad to see companies increasingly turning to patent trolling and shaking down actual innovators when they can no longer compete in the market.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/13542518617/will-rim-go-full-on-patent-troll.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/13542518617/will-rim-go-full-on-patent-troll.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/13542518617/will-rim-go-full-on-patent-troll.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>if-you-can't-innovate,-you-litigate</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120423/13542518617</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:55:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Early Mobile Internet Company That Failed To Adapt Becomes Patent Troll</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120418/03490318538/early-mobile-internet-company-that-failed-to-adapt-becomes-patent-troll.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120418/03490318538/early-mobile-internet-company-that-failed-to-adapt-becomes-patent-troll.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've seen it all too often: some companies are perhaps ahead of their time, and they fail in the marketplace, so they <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071101/185058.shtml">turn into</a> patent trolls, making sure everyone who succeeds has to pay up.  It's difficult to see how that promotes innovation in any way, as it appears to be rewarding failure in the marketplace, while punishing success.  Either way, the latest company to go down this sad route is the former Openwave, which has <a href="http://www.wirelessweek.com/News/2012/04/business-Openwave-sells-renames-itself-unwired/?et_cid=2594986&#038;et_rid=54131422&#038;linkid=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wirelessweek.com%2fNews%2f2012%2f04%2fbusiness-Openwave-sells-renames-itself-unwired%2f" target="_blank">sold off its remaining businesses, with the intent of being a full time patent troll</a>, under the name Unwired Planet (the company's original name back in 1996 before it became Openwave -- one of a series of names it had, including Software.com, Phone.com and Libris).
<br /><br />
Some of you may remember Openwave as a company that helped get WAP browsers on lots of phones, and sold services and WAP gateways back in the early days of the mobile internet.  Of course, Openwave then failed to innovate, failed to keep up with the changing market, and became pretty obsolete.  But rather than just go out of business, it's gone full-on patent troll.  Amusingly, the company is pitching this as "a major milestone."  Yes, it's a "milestone" that instead of just failing and shutting down, you're now going to shake down other more innovative companies.

<blockquote><i>
CEO Mike Mulica said in the company's announcement that the sale to Marlin marked a "major milestone" in its new corporate strategy.  Mulica has been a major driver of the patent initiative since he took his post last October. 
<br /><br />
"As we complete the sale of our product businesses, we will continue to focus on a multi-pronged strategy to realize the value of our unique patent portfolio," Mulica said.
</i></blockquote>
The company already started down this road last year by suing both Apple and RIM -- but it sounds like such activities are going to expand.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120418/03490318538/early-mobile-internet-company-that-failed-to-adapt-becomes-patent-troll.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120418/03490318538/early-mobile-internet-company-that-failed-to-adapt-becomes-patent-troll.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120418/03490318538/early-mobile-internet-company-that-failed-to-adapt-becomes-patent-troll.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>failed-companies-litigate</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120418/03490318538</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:39:20 PDT</pubDate>
<title>:-( Samsung, Research In Motion Sued For Making It Easy To Use Emoticons</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120316/15200318145/samsung-research-motion-sued-making-it-easy-to-use-emoticons.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120316/15200318145/samsung-research-motion-sued-making-it-easy-to-use-emoticons.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ All the way back in 2001, we wrote about how the brilliant satirists at Despair Inc. successfully <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20010124/1312253.shtml">trademarked :-(</a> and announced that they planned to sue 7 million internet users for violating the trademark.  The <a href="http://www.despair.com/frownonthis.html" target="_blank">actual announcement</a> was pretty funny -- even though <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/01/01/26/1525258/despair-suing-7000000-email-users-over--" target="_blank">not everyone</a> got the joke.  In 2006, we also had a story that mentioned a whole bunch of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060126/0223243.shtml">patents</a> and patent applications related to emoticons.
<br /><br />
It appears that one of those is now being used <a href="http://paidcontent.org/article/419-samsung-research-in-motion-sued-for-using-emoticons-/#keep_reading" target="_blank">in a lawsuit against Samsung and RIM</a> for having the gall to create a button that makes it easy to pick an emoticon without typing it in.  The patent in question (<a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=fh1_AAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=frontcover&#038;dq=7167731&#038;hl=en&#038;sa=X&#038;ei=SaxjT-WEOOf10gHtqsmqCA&#038;ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA" target="_blank">US Patent 7,167,731</a>) really is for having a button that lets you pick emoticons.  How this is possibly patentable is beyond me.  But, for some reason, examiner Lee Nguyen thought it was somehow non-obvious.  The patent was originally assigned to Wildseed, a mobile accessories firm that AOL bought in 2005.  The patent itself then went to Varia Mobil, who moved it to Varia Holdings to Varia and back to Varia Holdings.  It's Varia Holdings bringing the lawsuit.  Varia appears to just be a trolling operation (of course).
<br /><br />
It's fairly stunning that anyone considered this a valid patent at any point.  That it's now being used as the basis for a lawsuit should (once again) raise significant questions about the USPTO's approval process for patents.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120316/15200318145/samsung-research-motion-sued-making-it-easy-to-use-emoticons.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120316/15200318145/samsung-research-motion-sued-making-it-easy-to-use-emoticons.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120316/15200318145/samsung-research-motion-sued-making-it-easy-to-use-emoticons.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>thus,-infringing-a-patent</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120316/15200318145</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:39:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Leaked Memo Confirms Apple, Nokia &#038; RIM Gave Indian Gov't Backdoors</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120109/01533717336/leaked-memo-confirms-apple-nokia-rim-gave-indian-govt-backdoors.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120109/01533717336/leaked-memo-confirms-apple-nokia-rim-gave-indian-govt-backdoors.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Way back in the beginning of 2008, we wrote about how the Indian government was demanding that various mobile suppliers <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/013805527.shtml">provide backdoors</a> so it could intercept emails and text messages.  In 2010, we wrote about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml">further demands</a> to spy on Gmail and Skype.   Finally, at the end of 2010, the fact that various providers were providing backdoors to the Indian government was effectively revealed when the government <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml">complained</a> that RIM's backdoor didn't really reveal everything.  So, I'm not entirely sure why people are surprised that a leaked memo has <a href="http://blogs.computerworld.com/19531/hacked_memo_leaked_apple_nokia_rim_supply_backdoors_for_govt_intercept" target="_blank">revealed that at least Apple, Nokia and RIM all provided the Indian government with backdoors</a>, and those are being used regularly in a surveillance dragnet.
<br /><br />
Where it gets potentially more interesting is the report that the government then used such access to intercept emails from  US government officials, including the "<a href="http://www.uscc.gov/" target="_blank">US-China Economic and Security Review Commission</a>" -- "a U.S. government body with a mandate to monitor, investigate and report to Congress on 'the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship' between the U.S. and China."  Kinda says something when the US commission on security issues can't even secure their own email from snooping foreign governments, huh?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120109/01533717336/leaked-memo-confirms-apple-nokia-rim-gave-indian-govt-backdoors.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120109/01533717336/leaked-memo-confirms-apple-nokia-rim-gave-indian-govt-backdoors.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120109/01533717336/leaked-memo-confirms-apple-nokia-rim-gave-indian-govt-backdoors.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>though,-that-should-have-been-known-already</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120109/01533717336</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:10:11 PDT</pubDate>
<title>UK Prime Minister Wants To Ban Suspected Rioters From Facebook &#038; Twitter</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/11531615478/uk-prime-minister-wants-to-ban-suspected-rioters-facebook-twitter.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/11531615478/uk-prime-minister-wants-to-ban-suspected-rioters-facebook-twitter.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ After initially <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110808/16081115441/london-riots-blame-blackberry.shtml">blaming the Blackberry</a> and suggesting that Blackberry's messaging service <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml">be shut down</a> to try to quell the UK riots, it seems that UK politicians are trying to up the level of "bad ideas in reaction to riots" with Prime Minister David Cameron <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/11/david-cameron-rioters-social-media" target="_blank">suggesting that those who are suspected of rioting be banned from social networks</a> like Twitter and Facebook.
<blockquote><i>
David Cameron has told parliament that in the wake of this week's riots the government is looking at banning people from using social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook if they are thought to be plotting criminal activity.
<br /><br />
The prime minister said the government will review whether it is possible to stop suspected rioters spreading online messages, in his opening statement during a Commons debate on Thursday on the widespread civil disorder for which MPs were recalled from their summer recess.
</i></blockquote>
I'm at a loss to see how anyone believes that cutting off communication for people who feel disenfranchised will suddenly make them <i>less interested</i> in rioting.  There's this rush by people in charge to think that "if only we could stop them from spreading messages, that will calm them down."  That seems likely to be a giant miscalculation.  It's not hard to get around any such ban, and instituting such a ban is just likely to piss off the very people they're trying to calm down.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/11531615478/uk-prime-minister-wants-to-ban-suspected-rioters-facebook-twitter.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/11531615478/uk-prime-minister-wants-to-ban-suspected-rioters-facebook-twitter.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/11531615478/uk-prime-minister-wants-to-ban-suspected-rioters-facebook-twitter.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>oh-come-on</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110811/11531615478</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Aug 2011 19:03:07 PDT</pubDate>
<title>British MP Calls On RIM To Shut Down Messenger Services To Stop Riots; Because Pissing Off Rioters Calms Them Down?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ After some have been <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110808/16081115441/london-riots-blame-blackberry.shtml">blaming the Blackberry</a> for facilitating the London riots, it seems that some politicians are hanging their hopes on that to the point that they actually think that shutting down Blackberry's messaging feature will help.  MP David Lammy apparently <a href="http://techpresident.com/short-post/call-curtail-london-rioting-focuses-encrypted-mobile-messaging-service?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A techpres %28techPresident%29" target="_blank">is asking RIM to shut off its Blackberry Messaging Service</a> because nothing quells a bunch of angry, rioting young people like trying to cut off their ability to communicate.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110809/16120715459/british-mp-calls-rim-to-shut-down-messenger-services-to-stop-riots-because-pissing-off-rioters-calms-them-down.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>umm...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110809/16120715459</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 4 Aug 2011 22:09:34 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Patent Loving Court Strikes Again: CAFC Orders USPTO To Reconsider NTP Patents It Had Rejected</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110802/11494415363/patent-loving-court-strikes-again-cafc-orders-uspto-to-reconsider-ntp-patents-it-had-rejected.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110802/11494415363/patent-loving-court-strikes-again-cafc-orders-uspto-to-reconsider-ntp-patents-it-had-rejected.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We have discussed at great lengths the problems of the US setting up a specialized appeals court that handles patent cases, known as CAFC or the court of appeals for the federal circuit.  That court has tended to lean increasingly "pro-patent" over the years, presiding over the greatest judicial-driven expansion of the patent system and what it covers.  For a few years, the Supreme Court had started smacking down the massive overreach of CAFC, but in the past two years, it's started to back down and let CAFC do its thing again.
<br /><br />
If there was a "poster child" for the ridiculous excesses of the patent system, it was NTP, the results of a company that completely flopped in the marketplace (because it couldn't execute) that then successfully used the patent system to pressure RIM -- a company who successfully executed where NTP failed -- to hand over an <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060303/1446243.shtml">astounding $612.5 million</a>, even as the USPTO had made it clear that it found NTP's patents <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060222/1155242.shtml">unlikely to be valid</a>.
<br /><br />
Despite NTP and its small group of investors making out like bandits on the RIM case, they <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml">continued</a> to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml">sue</a> a lot more companies.  Unlike in the RIM case, where the judge put tremendous pressure on RIM to settle, even as the USPTO had made it clear that it was likely to reject NTP's patents, in these other cases, the judges wisely decided to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml">wait</a> for the USPTO, who did, in fact, invalidate many NTP patent claims.
<br /><br />
And, of course, NTP appealed the USPTO's reasoning... and along comes CAFC to say <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-01/blackberry-foe-ntp-wins-appeals-court-ruling-on-7-patents.html" target="_blank">that the USPTO got it wrong</a>, and it needs to reconsider its invalidation of claims in seven of NTP's patents, meaning that NTP has, yet again, been given new life.  And, of course, thanks to the somewhat idiotic and dangerous "presumption of validity," this means that the courts need to treat those patents as valid while the USPTO reviews them yet <i>again</i>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110802/11494415363/patent-loving-court-strikes-again-cafc-orders-uspto-to-reconsider-ntp-patents-it-had-rejected.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110802/11494415363/patent-loving-court-strikes-again-cafc-orders-uspto-to-reconsider-ntp-patents-it-had-rejected.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110802/11494415363/patent-loving-court-strikes-again-cafc-orders-uspto-to-reconsider-ntp-patents-it-had-rejected.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>amazing</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110802/11494415363</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 1 Jul 2011 01:42:44 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nortel Patents Sold For $4.5 Billion To Apple, EMC, Microsoft, RIM, Ericsson &#038; Sony</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Well, it wasn't too difficult to see this one coming.  A year ago, all that was left of Nortel was a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100528/1654189625.shtml">giant patent portfolio</a> that everyone knew would result in a bidding war.  At the time, people predicted the portfolio was worth an astounding $1.1 billion.  Back in April, Google made news by placing a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110404/11211213768/does-google-have-patent-problem-does-patent-system-have-google-problem.shtml">$900 million "stalking horse"</a> bid for the patents, which had many people shaking their heads at the size of the bid.  Google had made it pretty clear that it was seeking to buy the patents to keep them from being used by others to sue and block Google.  Of course, Microsoft <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110614/11413514688/microsoft-to-us-govt-hey-only-we-should-be-able-to-use-patents-to-shakedown-other-companies.shtml">whined</a> and complained to the government about how unfair it would be if Google won the patents.  The government was apparently unconcerned.
<br /><br />
So, Microsoft apparently got together with Apple, EMC, Ericsson, RIM and Sony... <a href="http://allthingsd.com/20110630/nortel-patents-go-to-group-that-includes-apple-microsoft-rim-and-more/" target="_blank">and coughed up an insane $4.5 billion</a>.  It's kind of brilliant in a nefarious way.  With six companies together, they could each spend less than the $900 million initially pitched by Google... and then just all agree not to sue each other, but leave open the option to sue anyone else.  And, given just how aggressive these companies have been with patents lately, you can rest assured that "license" demands will be made and there will almost certainly be lawsuits.  Progress via the courtroom, apparently.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110701/01110214930/nortel-patents-sold-45-billion-to-apple-emc-microsoft-rim-ericsson-sony.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>this-won't-end-well</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110701/01110214930</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:08:04 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Phone That Can Search The Internet &#038; Display Ads Patented; Everyone Sued</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110401/13154513731/phone-that-can-search-internet-display-ads-patented-everyone-sued.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110401/13154513731/phone-that-can-search-internet-display-ads-patented-everyone-sued.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Looks like it may be time to update our <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml">patent thicket graphic</a>.  Another company that's not actually doing anything in the space is suing everyone who is.  A company named H-W Technology apparently holds a patent (<a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=O27GAAAAEBAJ&#038;dq=7,525,955" target="_blank">7,525,955</a>) on an "Internet protocol (IP) phone with search and advertising capability" and has <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20049714-94.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20&#038;dlvrit=142337" target="_blank">sued Apple, RIM, Google, Amazon, eBay, HTC, LG, Smasung, Microsoft, Nokia, Verizon and others</a> for violating it.  Because, you know, I'm sure no one possibly could have figured out how to put search and ads on a phone without this patent.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110401/13154513731/phone-that-can-search-internet-display-ads-patented-everyone-sued.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110401/13154513731/phone-that-can-search-internet-display-ads-patented-everyone-sued.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110401/13154513731/phone-that-can-search-internet-display-ads-patented-everyone-sued.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>oh-come-on</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110401/13154513731</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:55:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Yet Another Company Claims Patents Over WiFi, Begins Suing</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110318/02541313537/yet-another-company-claims-patents-over-wifi-begins-suing.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110318/02541313537/yet-another-company-claims-patents-over-wifi-begins-suing.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The patent thicket around basic WiFi technology continues to grow.  Over the years, we've <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040923/0757224.shtml">pointed</a> to a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040623/232202.shtml">wide variety</a> of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071101/185058.shtml">companies</a> that were <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20041005/1939241.shtml">claiming</a> to hold <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100601/1913309652.shtml">patents</a> that were infringed by every implementation of WiFi.  In other words, WiFi's got a huge patent thicket issue to deal with.  The latest is that Canadian patent hoarder Mosaid Technologies <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/us-mosaid-idUSTRE72G6CK20110317?feedType=RSS&#038;feedName=technologyNews&#038;WT.tsrc=Social%20Media&#038;WT.z_smid=twtr-reuters_tech&#038;WT.z_smid_dest=Twitter" target="_blank">has claimed that its patents are violated</a>, and has sued  bunch of companies, including Dell, RIM and AsusTek.  Kinda funny that it seems like every one of the companies suing over WiFi patents doesn't actually make anything themselves...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110318/02541313537/yet-another-company-claims-patents-over-wifi-begins-suing.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110318/02541313537/yet-another-company-claims-patents-over-wifi-begins-suing.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110318/02541313537/yet-another-company-claims-patents-over-wifi-begins-suing.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>patent-thicket</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110318/02541313537</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 21:05:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>HP And RIM Produce Similar Device... Don't Freak Out</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/03523013351/hp-rim-produce-similar-device-dont-freak-out.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/03523013351/hp-rim-produce-similar-device-dont-freak-out.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=churchhatestucker">ChurchHatesTucker</a> points us to a recent story about how RIM's Playbook tablet device and interface looks incredibly similar to HP's TouchPad tablet device interface (using WebOS), but rather than get all freaked out about "copying," the <a href="http://blog.laptopmag.com/hp-says-blackberry-playbook-result-of-fast-imitation-cycle-rim-responds" target="_blank">two companies seem to handle this maturely</a>, noting that it's just the nature of innovation.  HP's initial response more or less suggests that RIM copied HP, but uses it as an opportunity to position itself as a leader in the space, rather than a follower:
<blockquote><i>
From HP:
<br /><br />
"It's a fast innovation cycle and a fast imitation cycle in this market, so we just know that we have the creative engine here to continue to build on what we have, and we'll keep innovating, we'll keep honing and those guys hopefully will continue to see the value in it and keep following us by about a year."<br />
<br />
RIM (Blackberry) responds.<br />
<br />
"Well, when you&rsquo;re trying to optimize user experience that juggles multitasking, multiple apps open at once and on a small screen, you&rsquo;re going to get people landing on similar kinds of designs."
</i></blockquote>
Notice no legal threats.  No claims of intellectual property violations.  Some might claim this is a "non-story," but in an age when the <i>default</i> so often seems to break out the lawyers, cease-and-desists and threats (if not outright lawsuits), it's nice to see a response like this.  In some ways it's more of a story, since it seems so rare.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/03523013351/hp-rim-produce-similar-device-dont-freak-out.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/03523013351/hp-rim-produce-similar-device-dont-freak-out.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/03523013351/hp-rim-produce-similar-device-dont-freak-out.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>man-bites-dog?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110303/03523013351</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Oct 2010 09:34:05 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Meet The Patent Thicket: Who's Suing Who For Smartphone Patents</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A few folks this week sent over a story in the Guardian by Josh Halliday and Charles Arthur with a graphic purporting to show <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/oct/04/microsoft-motorola-android-patent-lawsuit#" target="_blank">who was suing who in the smartphone space</a>, following the news that Microsoft had sued Motorola.  You can see that graphic here:
<center>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/floorsixtyfour/5060806793/" title="mobilelawsuits-rvs-460 by floorsixtyfour, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/5060806793_af80824618.jpg" width="460" height="436" alt="mobilelawsuits-rvs-460" /></a>
</center>
Meanwhile, someone in our comments had pointed to <a href="http://ompldr.org/vNXFndg/lawsuitmap.gif" target="_blank">a very similar graphic</a>.
<br><br>
The problem is that both of these graphics are <b>wrong</b>.  The Guardian one admits that it was built off of the NY Times post from back in March that <A href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/an-explosion-of-mobile-patent-lawsuits/" target="_blank">that showed a similar graphic</a>, which we <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100304/1234218418.shtml">wrote about at the time</a>.  Here's that graphic:
<center>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/floorsixtyfour/4407267530/" title="bits-suepatent2-blogSpan by floorsixtyfour, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2726/4407267530_bb725e9434.jpg" width="375" height="500" alt="bits-suepatent2-blogSpan" /></a>
</center>
However, Joe Mullin quickly pointed out that <a href="http://thepriorart.typepad.com/the_prior_art/2010/03/new-york-times-publishes-chart-featuring-nonexistent-patent-lawsuits.html" target="_blank">the graphic was wrong</a> and included a bunch of lawsuits that never happened.  NY Times blogger Nick Bilton posted a correction to his story way back in March... so I'm unclear on why the two Guardian reporters were still using that as the basis of their own drawing.
<br><br>
Either way, with <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20018791-37.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_blank">Motorola suing Apple</a> for patent infringement, the already wrong graphic was now also out of date.  So, I figured <i>why not create my own</i>, correcting the original errors and adding in the new information.  
<br><br>
I ended up spending many hours on it, because once I started, I realized that to <i>really</i> show the state of the patent thicket, I couldn't just include the big name companies that were suing each other, because that's only a part of the story.  What about all of the non-practicing entities (so-called "patent trolls"), who were suing lots of these companies for infringement as well?  Doesn't that matter in understanding the thicket?  Of course, there are lots of them, so I focused on the higher profile NPE lawsuits -- the ones involving multiple defendants -- and added them to the chart too (in green).  And then, I added in a few other companies who actually make stuff but have been suing as well.  Once you start, it's difficult to know where to stop.  There are so many companies involved in so many lawsuits, some you just have to leave out.  However, I believe the image below gives you at least some sort of picture of the lawsuit situation concerning smartphones.  Some of these lawsuits have settled, but many are still ongoing.
<center>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/floorsixtyfour/5061246255/" title="smartphonethicket(3) by floorsixtyfour, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jpg" width="560" height="407" alt="smartphonethicket(3)" /></a>
</center>
Now, here's the crazy part: this is <b>just lawsuits</b>.  I thought about showing licensing deals in this chart as well, but that would have killed my whole weekend (in fact, just as I was finishing up this post, I saw that <a href="http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/more-mobile-patent-madness-microsoft-licenses-74-smartphone-related-patents-from-acacia/7606?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zdnet%2Fmicrosoft+%28ZDNet+All+About+Microsoft%29&utm_content=Google+Reader" target="_blank">Microsoft has just licensed 74 smartphone patents from Acacia</a>).  And then I thought about including companies like Intellectual Ventures which apparently are <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20001235-94.html" target="_blank">sitting on a bunch of other smartphone patents</a> but haven't yet sued over them.  However, I'd already wasted hours that could have been spent doing other, less brain-damaging work, and decided to leave it like this and move on.
<br><br>
Anyway, I'd say this does a damn good job demonstrating the concept of a patent thicket.  It also explains how such thickets are  hindering innovation.  Anyone who wants to get into the smartphone business knows that they're facing lawsuits from a large number of the companies listed on the graphic.
<br><br>
<b>Update</b>: Someone just pointed out that Ars Technica apparently <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/10/motorola-asks-itc-two-federal-courts-to-throw-book-at-apple.ars" target="_blank">made their own graphic</a>, which is <i>really</i> pretty.... but also relies on the same bad data that the NY Times used and corrected months ago.
<br><br>
<b>Update 2:</b>  Apparently <i>everyone</i> had the same idea.  The folks at Information is Beautiful <a href="http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/10/the-tangled-web-of-mobile-patent-suits.html" target="_blank">made another version</a> of the same chart... again including the incorrect information from the NY Times (though, at least they admit those lawsuits are about LCD price fixing, not patents).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101007/22591311328/meet-the-patent-thicket-who-s-suing-who-for-smartphone-patents.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>now,-with-more-troll</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101007/22591311328</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 1 Oct 2010 02:01:34 PDT</pubDate>
<title>India Upset With RIM Because Solution To Spy On Emails Doesn't Work Well</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A couple years ago, the Indian government started <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/013805527.shtml">demanding</a> that RIM give them a backdoor to read encrypted Blackberry email messages.  At the time, RIM insisted that was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080527/0112411225.shtml">technically impossible</a> due to end-user encryption (something that's been called into question due to RIM's agreements with other countries, such as <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/07/blackberrysaudi-arabia-de_n_674621.html" target="_blank">Saudi Arabia</a>).  A few months after that exchange, India announced that it didn't matter any more because it had <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/0200222339.shtml">cracked the encryption</a>, and could spy on messages at will.
<br /><br />
So it seemed a bit odd when India <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml">again demanded</a> access to RIM Blackberry messages, leading to a standoff where RIM eventually "backed down" and offered to help India spy on users.  However, the Indian government is <a href="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/telecom/DoT-rejects-BlackBerrys-email-decoding-solution/articleshow/6661267.cms" target="_blank">now complaining that the solution doesn't let them spy enough</a>:
<blockquote><i>
The telecom department has rejected the interception solution offered by Canada's (RIM) for its secure corporate email service. What's more is that it has spurned RIM's technical solution for decoding all chat communication on the popular BlackBerry Messenger service...
<br /><br />
In an internal note, dated September 28, reviewed by ET, the telecom department's security wing claims security agencies have been unable to intercept or monitor secure email communication made through the (BES) in readable format. "RIM maintains that it does not have the keys that can be offered to security agencies for converting secure corporate email into readable format," said a senior DoT official with direct knowledge of the matter. The DoT internal note claims law enforcement agencies have failed to intercept chats on the BlackBerry Messenger platform, which runs counters to the home ministry's recent position that it is satisfied with the interception solution offered by RIM. 
</i></blockquote>
Reading between the lines, it sounds like RIM is still sticking to the fact that, thanks to end-user encryption, it simply can't reveal the message contents -- but it sounds like it agreed to offer access to other information, which the Indian government feels is not enough.  Of course, for all of India's rather public admission that it wants to spy on all sorts of communications, it doesn't seem to recognize that it's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/business/global/28secure.html?src=busln" target="_blank">scaring companies away from doing business in India</a>, as the threat of having communications spied upon is too big a risk.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100930/23010711242/india-upset-with-rim-because-solution-to-spy-on-emails-doesn-t-work-well.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>time-to-stop-using-your-blackberry</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100930/23010711242</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Aug 2010 02:14:55 PDT</pubDate>
<title>RIM Works Out Deal In Saudi Arabia, Causing Many To Wonder If They Can Trust Their BlackBerry</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100808/23251910541.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100808/23251910541.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ With last week's news that the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia were going to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml">block access</a> for BlackBerry users over the inability to spy on RIM's servers, the news over the weekend that Saudi Arabia is <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67151F20100808?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtechnologyNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Technology%29" target="_blank">testing three local servers</a> that would alleviate the need for a ban has <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/technology/09rim.html?src=twt&twt=nytimestech&pagewanted=all" target="_blank">many wondering how secure their BlackBerry communications really are</a>.
<br><br>
Of course, the more pertinent question may be how secure BlackBerry communications have <i>ever</i> been.  One of the big complaints from the UAE and Saudi Arabia (and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/013805527.shtml">others</a>) is that they believe RIM already lets certain governments access content flowing across their network.  And, of course, no one seems willing to come out with a straight answer one way or the other on whether or not that's an accurate statement.  However, as the NY Times article above makes clear, whether or not governments really do have access to RIM's network probably isn't as meaningful as some believe, since there are multiple different potential points of access for anyone wishing to monitor messages.  About the only thing that is clear is that if you're communicating online, it's probably best to assume that, sooner or later, someone other than the intended recipients will probably see it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100808/23251910541.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100808/23251910541.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100808/23251910541.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>well,-you-never-could-before...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100808/23251910541</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 2 Aug 2010 16:00:13 PDT</pubDate>
<title>United Arab Emirates And Saudi Arabia Banning Blackberry Usage</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Ash Crill alerts us to the news that the United Arab Emirates has <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/08/01/2010-08-01_uae_to_ban_blackberry_emails_over_security_fears_saudi_arabia_set_to_follow.html" target="_blank">announced plans to ban the use of Blackberries</a>, and that Saudi Arabia has announced its intention to do the same.  The issue is one we've seen before.  The way the Blackberry works is all the data is encrypted and sent through RIM's servers.  This <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/013805527.shtml">pisses off</a> governments who want to spy on the data.  RIM, in the past, has noted that it has <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080527/0112411225.shtml">no way</a> of spying on the email, even if some governments claim to have <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/0200222339.shtml">figured it out anyway</a> (a claim that seems somewhat dubious as that same government later demanded RIM <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml">break the encrytpion</a> again).  It appears that a lot of folks in the UAE are quite upset about this -- especially as parts of the UAE (Dubai in particular) have spent the last decade plus trying to present themselves as an ideal place for foreign business activity.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100801/21561710443.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>can't-be-monitored</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100801/21561710443</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:52:35 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Spam Filtering? Patented! 36 Companies Sued</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100722/02481510317.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100722/02481510317.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ These kinds of lawsuits are coming fast and furious again these days.  <a href="http://twitter.com/glynmoody/statuses/19236094719" target="_blank">Glyn Moody</a> points us to the news that <a href="http://thenextweb.com/us/2010/07/21/texas-company-says-it-owns-patent-to-spam-filtering-sues-google-apple-yahoo-dell-aol-ibm-30-others/?utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A TheNextWeb %28The Next Web Top Stories%29&#038;utm_content=Google Reader" target="_blank">36 companies have been sued for patent infringement</a> in Marshall, Texas (of course) for supposedly violating a patent (<a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=w58DAAAAEBAJ&#038;dq=6,018,761" target="_blank">6,018,761</a>) on spam filtering.  The companies sued represent a who's who of corporate America, including Apple, Google, HP, RIM, Citigroup, Capital One, Alcatel Lucent, AIG, AOL, JP Morgan Chase, McAfee, Symantec, Yahoo, IBM and many others.
<br /><br />
The patent itself is rather simple.  So simple, I can repeat the entire claims section right here (not the abstract, the actual claims).  Also, note how many typos there are.  You would think, in such a short patent, someone would have caught typos like "usinig," "processine" and "usefiul.":
<blockquote><i>
What is claimed is:
<ol>
<li> A method of obtaining context information about a sender of an electronic message using a mail processing comprising the steps of:
<br /><br />
    scanning the message, usinig the mail processine program to determine if the message contains a reference in a header portion of the message to at least one feature of the sender's context, wherein the sender's context is information about the sender or the message that is usefiul to the recipient in understanding more about the context in which the sender sent the message;<br />
    if the message contains such reference, using the mail processing program and such reference to obtain [sender] the context information from a location external to the message;<br />
    if the message does not contain such reference, using the mail processing program and information present in the message to indirectly obtain the [sender] context information using external reference sources to find a reference to the [sender] context information.
<br /><br /></li>
<li> The method of claim 1, wherein the reference to at least one feature is a reference to a location where context information is stored.
<br /><br /></li>
<li> The method of claim 1, wherein the reference to at least one feature is a hint usable to retrieve a location where context information is stored.
</li></ol>
</i></blockquote>
How could someone possibly approve this as a patent?  This is about as basic a filter as you can imagine.  Someone should sue the USPTO for fraud on America for approving this patent.
<br /><br />
In the meantime, the press release <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-lanier-law-firm-files-infringement-lawsuit-over-email-spam-patent-98916544.html" target="_blank">announcing the lawsuit</a> is funny as well.  The lawyers claim "the company's patent is one of the building blocks for all email communications.  InNova's complaint alleges that the defendant companies have used InNova's invention without permission for years."  Please, don't make everyone laugh.  It is not one of the "building blocks for all email communications."  It's a basic filter that any first year programmer could have written in no time flat.
<br /><br />
Oh, but it gets better:
<blockquote><i>
"Email as we know it would essentially stop working if it weren't for InNova's invention," says Mr. Banys... "More than 80 percent of email is spam, which is why companies use InNova's invention rather than forcing employees to wade through billions of useless emails. Unfortunately, the defendants appear to be profiting from this invention without any consideration for InNova's legal patent rights."
</i></blockquote>
First of all, <i>actual</i> spam filtering is a hell of a lot more sophisticated than the methods in this patent, and the idea that email would stop working without this patent existing is pretty laughable.  This is such a basic concept that it boggles the mind that anyone thought it was patentable.
<br /><br />
While the initial link above refers to InNova as a "Texas company," as per usual, it appears to be such in name only.  There is no information as to who's actually behind the company, but it seems likely they're not based in Texas.  The only reason the company is "based in Texas" is to file a lawsuit in Marshall.  At the very least, InNova does have a <a href="http://www.innovapatentlicensing.com/home.html" target="_blank">very simple website</a> where it pretends that it actually does something and has a "portfolio" of patents.  Except, if you dig deeper, you see it's just this single patent.  But my favorite part of the webpage is this opening paragraph:
<blockquote><i>
Ours is a world of technology, where companies are measured, by their customers, their competitors and the media, by the quality, utility and innovation of their products. Because no single company has a lock on innovation, InNova Patent Licensing LLC offers medium- and large enterprises creative solutions to the problem of staying relevant in today's business climate. 
</i></blockquote>
InNova has no customers, competitors or products.  All it has is a painfully ridiculous patent.  And it's trying to lock down innovation.  What a joke.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100722/02481510317.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100722/02481510317.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100722/02481510317.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>uh...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100722/02481510317</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:02:43 PDT</pubDate>
<title>NTP Keeps On Making The Case For Patent Reform As It Sues More Companies</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ NTP, a patent holding firm that is really just a bunch of lawyers with incredibly broad and questionable patents, is at it again.  As you probably know, NTP was locked in a long and contentious patent fight with RIM over NTP's claimed patents covering the concept of mobile email.  Even as the US Patent Office was telling the world that <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060222/1155242.shtml">NTP's patents almost certainly weren't valid</a>, pressure from investors (and the judge in the case who refused to wait for the Patent Office's final rejection of the patents) resulted in RIM <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060303/1446243.shtml">settling the case</a> for $612.5 million.  For RIM, it became something of a no brainer.  Even though its legal position was strong, its investors were killing the company over the uncertainty (there were threats that the judge could issue an injunction shutting down the entire Blackberry network).  Settling the case helped RIM's stock price jump up (increasing its market cap more than the cost of the settlement).
<br /><br />
But, from a legal perspective, the lawsuit and the end result became the centerpiece of attention for efforts at patent reform.  While I still think that the patent reform process in Congress has been misguided and the end result probably a lot more damaging than helpful, many of the politicians involved will point to the RIM-NTP case as evidence of the problems with the patent system.  You might think, then, that NTP's investors might sit back and enjoy the spoils of the RIM settlement, but the company quickly went back out and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070911/162434.shtml">sued all the major mobile operators</a> in the US for violating its patents.  However, judges in those other suits said (unlike the judge in the RIM case) that those trials should <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071107/014547.shtml">wait</a> until the Patent Office has made a final decision on the validity of NTP's ridiculously overbroad patents.
<br /><br />
However, NTP is not waiting around.  It's now suing again.  This time, rather than the mobile operators, it's going after device makers and platform vendors, <a href="http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/smartphone-patent-suits-challenge-big-makers/" target="_blank">suing Apple, Google, Microsoft, HTC, LG and Motorola</a>.  Basically, it appears that NTP has decided that if anyone does email on a phone, they have to pay NTP.
<br /><br />
There might not be a better example of how incredibly screwed up the patent system is than this.  NTP was involved in an attempt to do mobile email ages ago (and it <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070416/021539.shtml">wasn't the first</a> actually... but NTP <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060417/0324230.shtml">paid off</a> some folks who had prior art).  The idea itself wasn't new or all that innovative, and the timing was off, so NTP failed.  In a functioning free market, that's a good thing.  If a company can't execute, it should fail.  Unfortunately, thanks to a ridiculously overbroad patent award, NTP has been able to live on as a bunch of lawyers suing any company that does figure out how to execute.
<br /><br />
Perhaps the only good thing coming out of this is that it may help draw more attention to just how broken the patent system is.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/11531110156.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>milking-it</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100709/11531110156</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 7 Jul 2010 01:46:01 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Indian Government Demands Right To Spy On Skype, Gmail, Blackberry Messages</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Last year we noted that Indian intelligence officials were <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091013/0154446504.shtml">quite concerned about Skype</a>, and the fact that they couldn't easily tap into communications on Skype.  Two years ago, we noted a similar story concerning <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20080313%2F013805527&#038;threaded=true&#038;sp=1">RIM Blackberry emails</a>.  Now <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/07/02/2137207/Indian-Government-Threatens-RIM-Skype-With-Ban?from=twitter" target="_blank">Slashdot</a> points us to the news that India's government is once again <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/200257/reports_blackberry_skype_google_face_india_data_demand.html" target="_blank">demanding that Skype and RIM</a> make sure their services are in formats that can be read by law enforcement.  A separate article says <a href="http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2010/07/01/stories/2010070153420100.htm" target="_blank">similar demands are being made on Google</a> with respect to Gmail.
<br /><br />
Of course, last time this happened (with RIM, at least), RIM pointed out that there's simply <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080527/0112411225.shtml">no way</a> for it to decrypt email sent by users, since it's based on an encryption key set up by the end user.  In response, the Indian government claimed that it had <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/0200222339.shtml">cracked the encryption used by Blackberries</a> and was able to monitor messages sent via those devices.  Of course, the fact that it's now pressuring RIM to format messages in easily spied-upon ways, certainly suggests the news of the cracking of Blackberry's encryption was somewhat exaggerated.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100702/17551510065.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>spying-more-important-than-productivity</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100702/17551510065</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>