NTP Sues Palm, Alleging Patent Violation
mikesd81 writes "The Seattle Time reports that NTP is now going after Palm for patent infringement on technology used in their devices. The suit asks the court to bar Palm from continuing to infringe on NTP's patents and seeks monetary damages for the alleged past infringements. At issues are eleven patents, dating from 1995 to 2001, according to the lawsuit. Five of the patents were part of NTP's lawsuit against RIM. The Palm complaint also centers on products, services and systems that integrate e-mail systems with wireless communications, including the Treo, Palm VII, Palm i700 and Tungsten products." You may recall NTP from the just-finished Blackberry case. Good to know they're staying busy.
When you pay a blackmailer to leave you alone, even if they do, you've paid them to stay alive long enough to bother someone else.
And when the cops won't stop them, they're unstoppable.
--
make install -not war
Dear NTP:
Please eat excrement and die.
Yes, it did work the first time and I don't see how anyone could be surprised by this. According to the article, NTP contacted 3Com (Palm's parent company) the same time they contacted RIM. Basically, NTP "annexed the Sudetenland" and RIM appeased them, thus setting a precedent. We all know how well appeasement works to deter aggression now, don't we?
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
I just want to know how they were harmed that they deserve damages. Was the sales of their non-existent products harmed by sales of Palms?
The patent itself is rediculous and a perfect example of why software patents must go. You have a PC-like device capable of displaying and inputting text. Just how inventive do you have to be to think, "Hey, you could use this for email!" That's patentable??
Well, another example that the world is reaching new extremes, and US is (usually) the first place for any extreme to occur. SO now it's perfectly normal to make money doing nothing, more: using the system that should provide the protection to the inventors to further encourage the development of new stuff.
Sometimes I really believe that self-destruction (or more often, self-mutilation) is something that people cannot live without.
If you don't manufacture anything... ... then you should be barred from making patent-based lawsuits.
The whole basis of the social contract of patents is to protect your enterprise during manufacturing. If you are not using the patent to manufacture anything, then you are just a parasite working against the very concept of patents and against the community.
But then, everyone knows that lawyers are just parasites anyway. I recommend DDT.
Indeed. And what really chaps my butt is that a year from now, a Treo is going to cost me $50 more than it otherwise would have because Palm has to figure out how to pay the lawyers they'll need to defend against this silliness. I think a lot of people (not so many here on Slashdot, but people in general) forget about that aspect of the frivolous lawsuit -- no matter who wins or loses, the attorneys get paid. And this creates higher prices, wipes out the companies with tighter margins (but possibly better products), and generally winnows everything down to our products being available only from the companies with the most lawyers (design and product relevance be damned).
I agree, too, with other posters here -- it's a stumper when there's nothing to boycott. It would sure be nice to do something to protest their behavior, but we're down to TP and flaming poop bags on the doorstep -- they don't DO anything (outside of file lawsuits). To paraphrase Say Anything (a good John Cusack movie from 1989) -- they don't buy anything sold or processed, sell anything bought or processed, or process anything bought or sold.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Actually yes...They settled to avoid a protracted court case. Patents being invalid or the entire case being baseless has nothing to do with battling in court, ask IBM. How much do you think IBM has pissed away already fighting the bogus SCO case?