Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RIM Wins BlackBerry Patent Dispute in UK

Posted by Zonk on from the one-down dept.

Guinnessy writes "Research In Motion has won its first patent case against Inpro Licensing. Justice Nicholas Pumfrey rejected a claim by Luxembourg-based Inpro Licensing SARL that it holds a UK patent on the technology used by RIM to transpose images and Internet files onto BlackBerry screens ruling that all the claims at issue were either obvious or lacking in novelty. It is the second European legal victory this year for RIM, following a Munich court's invalidation of a German version of the same patent. The big court case of course is on Feb 24 when a U.S. court will consider whether the BlackBerry service should be halted for infringing patents held by licensing firm NTP."

6 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. Question on Patents by fatjesus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why are companies allowed to sit on patents and wait for someone to come allong and violate it? Why aren't they forced to A) license it or B) to implement it? (If they choose neither then the patent should expire.)

    1. Re:Question on Patents by Plunky · · Score: 2, Interesting
      what you are proposing is the classic prisoners dilemma, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_dilemma for more details than you can shake a stick at.

      But you would never get a bunch of corporations to agree on such a thing. For one thing, one of them will have shareholders who DEMAND that they maximise their profits and step forward to licence the technology to get ahead of the pack.

      You might not think they are stupid, but most of them have more care about the short term profits than the long term.

  2. The belly of the bureaucracy by lifeisgreat · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I was sure there was a semi-recent interview by Slashdot with someone that worked at the USPTO, but I can't seem to find it.

    But really, can anyone fathom what actually goes on inside the USPTO? One assumes there must be people there who are fighting the incompetence and denying patents, only to be disciplined or fired, but I can't think of any examples of that. I just don't see how the USPTO could a) keep qualified people out or b) keep the qualified people inside from denying patents without using some kind of retribution.

    If I worked there, you can be damn sure that I'd deny 90% of the tech-related patents that came across my desk, fully justifying each decision, and wholly expecting to be disciplined or fired for not being a rubber-stamp. Then I'd sure as hell make a big stink about it. Why isn't this happening?

    --
    Don't Hate, Gestate
  3. One major check on the system by MikeRT · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Make it so that a company without any R&D division cannot file or own patents. A company that doesn't have employees paid to create new things shouldn't be allowed to own patents since it has not created anything, and thus doesn't need any incentives to create.

  4. counter sue by Twillerror · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Although I don't generally like sueing which got us in the case in the first place RIM should go after InPro with all their resources and crush them like a bug. Someone needs to put these patent companies in their place and set some precedence. This has cost not only RIM, but lots of other people money and time. If I was the government I'd go after InPro as well, think of all the tax dollars they have wasted.

  5. Re:Maybe they will learn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Someone should look it up. The minikeyboard patent in question looks like a really specific layout with precise distances between keys, shapes and everything. I'd call it an non-obvious innovation.