Slashdot Mirror
Feds Enter Blackberry Fray
Rick Zeman writes "Blackberry addicted US Feds have entered into the patent dispute between Canadian company Research in Motion and US patent-holders NTP. From the article: 'The Justice Department has filed a legal brief in a patent dispute, asking a federal court to delay any immediate shutdown of the popular wireless e-mail system to ensure that state and federal workers can continue to use their devices.' Apparently 10% of US Blackberry users are government users."
Ohhhhhh so what goes around comes around!!! Extend copyright = no problem. Allow stupid patents = no problem. "Oh wait... you mean, we have to live and work in this country where we made these stupid IP laws?"
I hope the injunction seeds and they all lose their blackberries to government folly. And hopefully the people will stand up and say this isn't fair. Maybe the fed will finally take a look at the state of patent law.
Let them suffer from their own patent laws.
It's the only way that things would get changed for the people.
In fact, I don't see why government should enjoy any special rights. Special rights distances them from the people they govern. Because they don't experience any real-life issues, they get out of touch and they don't realise when legislation and so on will actively affect the people they represent. It is best for standard government practices (not national security, etc) to have the same restrictions in law as the common citizen.
And government workers are special...why? In other words, if this screws your company who cares, but if it hurts bureaucracy, now we need to fix this.
...that government as an entity cares for its existence first and foremost.
The citizens wants their Blackberries, yet government says the Blackberry is illegal. Yet they need it, so they trump the law.
Most guns are illegal. Government can use any gun.
Killing is illegql. Guess who can kill without worry?
Here's the catch: government is composed of people who want control. People. The worst kind of people.
The problem is RIM and the carriers have no real easy way to just keep government users on. In lots of cases, the only thing that says "this device is the property of the US Government" is the billing address. Sometimes even that isn't tell-tale, there are lots of smaller exempt agencies where the Blackberry bill is sent to the user and lots of cases where there are separate billing and mail-the-bill to addresses. Your billing address is used by some carriers to establish who you are, and that you are the user of the device calling them for support, so it's typically set to something friendly to the users, like the address of their office.
I mean, say you have a RIM device billing to Jane Doe, 18023 Aurora Ste E, Lynnwood, and another billing to Dave Martin, 18023 Aurora, Lynnwood, and a third, billing to Steve Ellis, 18023 Aurora Ste E, Seattle.
Which do you turn off? Which ones belong to WA State? If you can't tell easily, how can the carrier?
.sig: Now legally binding!
Isn't the US doing the same by demanding they keep exclusive control of the root DNS and the internet itself? (Read: having control over an infrastructure used world wide for econimocal and government purposes)
But a national security that's dependent on a foreign power is insecure.
... at least in the defense ministry. Only double-checked open-source for the software (or special development and terms if there is no FOSS equivalent). But what about hardware? IMHO, to have "trusted" hardware is as important as "trusted" software.
Agreed. No more Windows, no more Oracle,
Million Dollar Screenshot
Although 10% of US Blackberry consumers are government employees you cannot merely shut off the 90% non-govt workers. The reason is that it is a security risk for the remaining 10% - it would be easier to identify members of the CIA, FBI, federal, state and local officials as they would not blend in with the 90% of business Blackberry users. This would render the Blackberry service useless to many of the government workers.
The government bailed out Iriduim (sp?) satellite phone system- it was deemed too useful to let go.
So let this be a good leason here- make the government rely on your services and you'll never really go out of business.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
The thing that bothers me is that the government which is supposed to be "of, by, and for the people" is not chiming into this lawsuit because of the effect it may have on its CITIZENs, but rather the effect it may have on its EMPLOYEEs.
Yes it is. National security is not a fair game - it's a nonstop battle to retain the advantage in protecting one's national resources, including technology. One reason the US has prospered has been general perception of it as a "fair dealer" that can be trusted to administer unique resources globally for fair access and mutual safety. Even despite many severe abuses by the US, it's generally been more fair and reliable than the other alternative governments.
Of course, the Bush administration has destroyed so much of that credibility that the US might never regain it. Other nations are certainly within their rights to try to grab their own national security interests from the US - even when there's no legitimate basis - especially when they're in fundamental conflict with the US, like China and even Brazil or Venezuela. But removing that control from the US creates an even more serious threat: the system will break more often, with a less manageable organization for fixing it, as well as include means for hostile attacks among conflicted nations.
The US can regain its credibility in Internet governance (damaged more by its other failures than any Internet problems) by fairly and firmly resolving the kerfuffle in the UN that threatens US control of the Net, and its perception of benevolence. Of course, Bush sending John "Blow Up the UN" Bolton to head our UN mission makes that even harder. These wranglings will probably boil for years, until we're rid of Bush and his criminally incompetent crew. And leave scars behind. By then perhaps the global Internet community will have developed technology that better models both mutual participation and self-determination than the current DNS tech, without risking fragmentation. We've all got a lot of work to do, motivated by enlightened self-interest.
--
make install -not war
How can you claim that 10% of government users having Blackberries constitute essential infrastructure? Are you trying to claim that the Blackberries are their only source of email service?
If a Canadian company was physically hosting a more significant percentage of US government email capabilities - or if it was really 10% of essential email { which you have not shown - just assumed} then I could understand your argument but to claim that 10% of handheld pushed email is essential infrastructure does not show a through understanding of the issue.
Using an argument similar to yours; the rest of the world's governments should ban Microsoft Windows, write the own OS's, as well as the majority of their own server & database software.
Oh and they should also each have their own internet!
As for your statement about "Of course, it also shows how the Feds mismanage national security, prioritizing fear and $BILLIONS in expenses, without identifying actual risks." Canadain companies that work on/or assist with US national security infratructure products are required to provide easy access and explanations to code, not just the services and programs but actual code.
If you can show that the US Feds have given over control of essential handheld pushed email services to a foreign company then I will be willing to listen but please don't try arguing that all government email is essential either!
Think about the essential service allies provide you by being your allies then think about how that truly rates against 10% of {hypothetically by most likely non-essential} handheld email service!
One reason the US has prospered has been general perception of it as a "fair dealer" that can be trusted to administer unique resources globally for fair access and mutual safety.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Best joke I've heard all week.
The point is in the title: the US government is dependent on a foreign corporation for an essential infrastructure. That fact isn't "xenophobic", in the perjorative sense
More like paranoia, in the non-sensical sense. A few government workers cut off from mobile e-mail access? Whoa, real threat to national security there. Tell me the military or critical infrastructure is running over this, not convienience functions for paper pushers.
This dimension to the conflict shows the security requirements of ensuring American tech is at the forefront. Even if just by ensuring an American company, entirely governed by the American government, has a license from the foreign supplier, and the means to produce independently if suddenly cut off.
Why yes, let's just force all companies to share their technology with the US government, and to be operated by American companies so that the US is never dependent on a foreign coroporation for essential infrastructure. Seemed to work out great for Soviet Russia and all the rest that tried this kind of forced nationalization and state-granted monopolies.
Of course, it also shows how the Feds mismanage national security, prioritizing fear and $BILLIONS in expenses, without identifying actual risks.
Oh, so Blackberry is a national security risk. Here's a few other suggestions:
1. Radical muslim terrorists
2. Vast national debt and production dependecy on China
3. Alienating many allies by the treatment of foreigners and foreign countries
4. Ongoing military operations in Iraq with little end in sight
I don't think the US realizes how much they've lost in standing in Europe over the last few years. It is no wonder the EU wants to take control of their DNS. How would you like it someone else was controlling the US internet? I'm sure you'd be spouting flames by then. People like you certainly don't help. Do you understand what it looks like when you want allies and trade partners, but at the same time you send the message loud and clear that we do not trust you, nor do we want to be dependent on trade with you? Good relations are built on commitments from both sides, do you ever wonder why the US has so few?
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Firstly, it has been like that for a long time. There isn't a country in this world that does not rely on products from other countries. That kind of economic independence hasn't been around for 50 years. If you think the Blackberry is important in that context, just think of all the hardware that's manufactured in Asia.
Secondly, total economic independence shouldn't even be a goal. Cooperation is not only economically beneficial (economies of scale, specialisation etc.), but is also an important factor in stabilizing the world. The #1 reason why there will never be war again between France and Germany is that both countries' wealth depend on trade with the other.
Fleur de Sel
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Oh and they should also each have their own internet! We do, it's called the SIPRNet. A complete network infrastructure that is physically isolated from the rest of the world on which each terminal has a two piece encryption system (box and removable hash key).
That seems a little simplistic. The government does actually rule against itself all the time. Even if you have the most cynical, Machiavellian view of the motivations and can't accept that anyone in government would do what's right just because it's the right thing to do, doesn't mean it's always in their interest to take for free what they should pay for. After all, the government is not a coorporation, and doesn't need to make a profit to survive. The outcome that worries me more here is that the feds will simply say "this is an essential service for our employees" and buy the patent rights or licence fee that the patent holder is demanding, thus ignoring the growing problem of submarine patents and rewarding the patent holder. Not that I really know that's the case here, but at least if some senators had their precious Blackberries screwed up by a licensing fiasco they might pay a little more attention to a problem that right now only techies seem to be aware of.
Umm... They are playing within the legal system here. They are asking the court that is considering an injunction against blackberry to consider the impact it would have to government operation. Companies and the public sector can do similar filings.
The main issue is what type of shutdown/shipment stop, if any, should happen for a system that has become critical to many folks knowing that the resolution of the patent dispute will take a decently long time (appeals and all). In my opinion no shutdown should take place but some type of escrow setup that Blackberry has to pay fines into. If in the end the patent holds this money would then go to the patent holder... or something like that.
Well, it depends on what side of the fence you're on. To relinquish that control is to put critical infrastructure in the hands of a foreign entity, if you're the United States.
Nobody is stopping foreign governments from switching to alternate root nameservers, the same way nobody is stopping US government agencies from switching remote email providers.
Email is nothing. IF (and think how in the hell this would actually be a problem) Blackberry as a canadian company started to act against the security interests of the United States... Come on. If Canada ever wanted to stick it to the U.S. it wouldnt be via Email. Canada is a net supplier of Electricity, Canada is the single largest supplier of oil to the United States. They supply approximately 10 billion dollars in goods a month more then is bought back from the U.S. And on 9/11 when air traffic was closed in the U.S. all those planes headed for U.S. destinations, the all got rerouted and landed in Canada. Canada just helped. Canada and Canadian companies are not a security threat. These two countries haven't taken shots at each other since 1812. Trust me, Canada got over it. You want to worry about technology security. Stop manufactuing critial tech in China. They pilllage you IP rights, and U.S. companies do that simply because labour is cheaper, and you sell stuff another billion customers. This arguement shouldnt be about security. It should be about a broken patent system that hands out patents to people who patent concepts, not actual devices.
If we ever got THAT pissed off at Canada anyway
More like the other way around. After all, the USA are the ones holding on to $5 billion in lumber import surcharges that have been deemed unfair by the NAFTA trade dispute resolution process. And W wonders why latin american countries are reluctant to pursue an america-wide trading agreement when he refuses to honour the existing trade agreement! Actions have consequences. W's actions in only accepting the portions of international agreements in his favour and rejecting the portions that are inconvenient have the consequence that his word and agreement are worth less than spit.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
And also not what the Founders intended, given that the people that served in Congress were performing a public service and would then get out and have to live with the laws they had passed while in power. That simple feedback mechanism was meant to help dissuade lawmakers from creating bad law. The problem is the modern class of professional politicians who don't have to suffer the consequences of their actions, except in the indirect case where technologies and services that would have been available to all are not, because their stupid lawmaking squelched them.
... without batting an eye he said, "But that would deny people the benefits of professional politicians" or words to that effect. Dubious benefits at best, I'd say.
Al Gore was once asked about his take on term limits
Congress limited the President's term of office, largely in order to prevent a popular President from staying in office for a long time, thereby denying any interested Congressperson his or her chance to hold the highest office. Unfortunately, they got it backwards: a good President should be allowed to remain in office. It is the Congresscritters that should be rotated out on a regular basis, since they do most of the damage.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
is not chiming into this lawsuit because of the effect it may have on its CITIZENs, but rather the effect it may have on its EMPLOYEEs.
How many government employees do you personally know? How many of them are not citizens? They also pay federal taxes, and are essentially their own employees. I just don't understand why people consider federal employees to be "thems," as if didn't suffer long commutes, bitch about their taxes, and dislike government waste just like the rest of us. There are definitely some sub-standard federal workers, but unfortunately it's almost impossible to fire them, and thus make their more effective co-workers more interested in sticking around.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
umm... yes there is. Up till that point, I assume no one had bothered to create such a device. Hence the innovation.
The requirement for a patent is "non obvious to someone knoweledgeable in the field."
Email is just "data passing over a medium that conveys a message."
The medium is irrelevant. It's bloody obvious that if a new transmission medium comes along that forms of communication will move with it. So, the grandparent was right. There is nothing original and non-obvious about moving email to a wireless device. If they want to patent some of the hardware in the device that cleverly allowed them to get the portable power necessary to process email, fine. But nothing is non-obvious about using email on a portable computer.
There is a very big difference between
10% of the US government are blackberry users
and
10% of blackberry users are from the US government
"Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
The law is the law is the law!
If the law is the law then how come Microsoft executives are not in jail for anti-trust, bundling, extortion and predatory pricing?
Here is a hint. The government does not want to prosecute companies unless they are foreign, and that is why 90 days and not indefinite. If it were Microsoft in this lawsuit NTP would still be spinning from how fast this would have got tossed out of court. Why?
Mail and writen communications have been sent over wireless long before NTP patents were even filed. In fact, NTPs sole reason for existence is to quietly file patents, wait until a productive company is successful then pounce on companies who deliver a product or service. Purely a predatory practice that serves no beneficial purpose for consumers or society. In fact I am surprised RIM has not made this case to the US courts that NTP practices are predatory and hurt the consumer by reducing competition and thus should be tossed out on that basis.
And NTP, with zero employees can't claim it is developing it's patent to a product. Americans should be appalled at how this is unfolding as it raises consumer costs, will reduce competition and innovation. Americans employed to support the system may well get laid off as a result.
Business are going to start to ask if they should sell in the US and if so, raise their prices in advance anticipating law suits from scrupulous paracites like NTP.