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
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
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.
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.