Slashdot Mirror


Last NTP Patent Tentatively Thrown Out

pcause writes "Reuters reports that the fifth NTP patent has been rejected. What does it say about the US Patent office and software patents that these patents have made it through trials, appeals, etc and only now has the Patent Office decided they weren't any good in the first place?" From the article: "The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has sided with BlackBerry portable e-mail device maker Research in Motion Ltd. by issuing a non-final rejection of a fifth patent at the center of its legal battle with patent holding company NTP Inc. The decision means the patent agency has now issued non-final rejections of all five patents at issue in a BlackBerry patent-infringement case before a federal judge."

4 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. Easy to side with RIM by drhamad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As easy as it is for me to want to side with RIM, and be excited that this last patent was thrown out...

    I'd like to know several things. First, what WAS the last patent? The article doesn't say - I'm sure someone could dig it up, though. Also, why was it rejected, and if there was good cause to reject it, why did it survive so much previous scrutiny? While the USPTO will accept almost anything at first - they don't do rigorous review of everything submitted, until it is challenged - they start scrutinizing them once court cases come up. So how did it survive previously if it could not survive now? Could this perhaps be only a political decision? The USPTO bowing to administration pressure?

    --
    -Daniel
  2. It Says... by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What does it say about the US Patent office and software patents that these patents have made it through trials, appeals, etc and only now has the Patent Office decided they weren't any good in the first place?

    It says that the USPTO has and will continue to issue bullshit patents on anything put in front of them, but that when a patent affects 25% of the government, regardless of validity, they will toss it out so they don't risk actual reform. No need to fret, however, any bullshit patents that only act as a cudgel for big businesses to kill or blackmail small businesses will remain inviolate.

  3. Drug companies beware by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This action by the USPTO will have HUGE implications for anyone that has a patent on anything.

    A patent is supposed to secure, for a limited time, exclusive use of the patented item for the inventor. What the USPTO has effectively done here is said:

    "We rubber stamp almost everything. You shouldn't build a business on a patent until it has been tried in the courts."

    Of course, most patents will not be tried in courts until there is money (and a big business) at stake....catch 22.

    A patent is supposed to be a guarantee - the due diligence should have been done before the patent was granted. Now, no business based on a patent has any reason to believe that their business is safe, or that they will recoup the costs of their investment until the courts decide so.

    The patents granted by the USPTO are effectively paper tigers and not worthy of investment trust.

    -ted

  4. Re:Washington is playing favorites by richieb · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Absolutely - and some smaller guy just got squashed by RIM. They went through all of the trouble of inventing something, having it patented and then having their technology stolen by RIM with no compensation.

    What exactly did the little guy invent? Delivery of email via radio waves? Was a protocol designed? Distribution system designed?

    --
    ...richie - It is a good day to code.