Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BlackBerry Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the umm-okay dept.

BlackBerry on Tuesday filed patent infringement lawsuit against Facebook, Whatsapp and Instagram in Los Angeles Federal court. In a statement, BlackBerry said: We have a lot of respect for Facebook and the value they've placed on messaging capabilities, some of which were invented by BlackBerry. As a cybersecurity and embedded software leader, BlackBerry's view is that Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp could make great partners in our drive toward a securely connected future, and we continue to hold this door open to them. However, we have a strong claim that Facebook has infringed on our intellectual property, and after several years of dialogue, we also have an obligation to our shareholders to pursue appropriate legal remedies.

50 of 87 comments (clear)

  1. translated by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since Blackberry hasn't created anything new or compelling in15 years we feel obligated to try and make some cash off our old crap, that we ripped off from ICQ/AOL/IRC and other software implementations that existed long before we came into being...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:translated by maxrate · · Score: 3, Informative

      Please check my facts, but RIM (BlackBerry) was sued/settled for something like 500 million by NTP in the USA for pretty lame reasons back in RIM's heyday. The legal system set the stage for this, I think RIM might very well be entitled to their claims and lawsuit against Facebook/etc. When RIM was doing great, these nimrods (NTP) came out of the woodwork and cashed in. RIM is doing poorly, it's time for them to make a few 'easy' bucks too it seems. Don't blame the player, blame the game.

    2. Re:translated by Revek · · Score: 2

      The 'game isn't being a dick' The player is.

    3. Re:translated by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      If they are going to keep software patents, then there should be some limitation on them where there is a period of time to report that they are illegally using their patent. Most of the abuse seems to come from, a patent that has been mostly ignored until someone else goes with it, becomes immensely popular and nearly non-removable feature. Then Sue them for a heck of a lot of money, because the idea has the potential. While you lacked the rest of the effort needed for it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re: translated by Brockmire · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are mistaking patents for trademarks. With patents, you don't sue right away so they can design around your patent and you get nothing, you wait a few years for damages to acrue. Then you collect a payday. But if you can fucking read, you'll see they've tried negotiations before, for years.

    5. Re:translated by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      BlackBerry has been a communications and software company since day one. Their messaging system BlackBerry Messenger set the bar for secure enterprise mobile communication. You can't see security so it isn't sexy like filters or emojis but if you don't have it eventually you'll wish you had. BlackBerry has actually been working their ass off making themselves and indispensable security partner in a whole host of industries. But sure since they don't make phones anymore they don't deserve to sue somebody for infringing on their patents.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    6. Re:translated by Archfeld · · Score: 1

      Actually you are correct, Blackberry as a mobile device or messenger is a dead or dying thing but QNX is another thing entirely and quite active and very competitive. It is just not a thing that the end-users see much of, being behind the scene so to speak.

      https://blackberry.qnx.com/en

      I remember when a blackberry device was the thing every executive had to have and quite successful, but iPhones and various other smart phones have marketed their way past and supplanted BB devices almost totally.

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    7. Re:translated by nonBORG · · Score: 1

      If you check Blackberry they are doing ok on financials. Looks like they have a Gross Profit of >0.5B however down a 1B from 2015.
      The thing about these companies is that they have had their wave and if they can survive the valley they may find their next wave or even a niche where they can exist at a lower level. Their shares are trading pretty solidly still so I am guessing they are doing well somewhere (not maybe at the consumer level.)

      With the patents they don't need to do anything for 15 years patents last 20 years, without looking at the actual patents I suspect that they have some good stuff to solve problems that no one else had solved at the time, if there is prior art I think FB etc have had ample time to find it and still can and challenge the legitimacy of the patents. Even though patents are abused by many it does not mean that they are in every case not legit, and if you had a patent and said to FB "hey pay me 1 billion for patent license." and they said "our offer is 1Mil" you might need someone who could push them closer to your figure. I suspect this is all about negotiation. Part of the game that these companies play.

      --
      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
    8. Re: translated by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately no as plaintiffs in a civil case has a duty to mitigate damages. Knowingly doing nothing for years undermines the plaintiffs case for damages.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:translated by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Since Blackberry hasn't created anything new or compelling in15 years we feel obligated to try and make some cash off our old crap, that we ripped off from ICQ/AOL/IRC and other software implementations that existed long before we came into being...

      One can only assume you're correct .. at first I thought the summary was shit, but as it turns out, the article is shit too.

      They're suing about some IP, but since it isn't named, we have no idea what it is .. this might as well be a fucking press release designed to get their name in the news again, but it otherwise contains no actual information.

      If BB felt there were patents being infringed, they should have done something about it years ago, because failing to enforce it is pretty much not going to do well in court.

      Whatever, BB hasn't been relevant in years, and the people they're picking fights with have deep pockets.

      Absent any facts, I'm left with no choice but to agree with your assessment. They've sunk so far into "who gives a fuck" that, well, who gives a fuck?

      According to TFS, they did. It says they have been in talks with these companies for years. They didn't get anywhere, so this is the next step. Sometimes (err.. always) legal shit takes a long time and is expensive.

    10. Re:translated by Archfeld · · Score: 1

      Pepperidge Farms remembers...Yes they do...

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    11. Re:translated by mysidia · · Score: 1

      "hey pay me 1 billion for patent license." and they said "our offer is 1Mil" you might need someone who could push them closer to your figure.

      $1 Mil for a patent license is some crazy low figure. $100 Mil at least, or bust. It costs more than $1 Million just for the patent research and registration costs to get the patent in force in the first place.

    12. Re:translated by sjames · · Score: 1

      I might buy that if they went after NTP. As it is, they're just multiplying the problem. If someone rips me off, that doesn't give me a free pass to rip you off, does it?

    13. Re:translated by sjames · · Score: 1

      Then the government of India asked them for the gold keys to the kingdom and they instantly caved, forever destroying their own reputation.

    14. Re:translated by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      contrary to public belief that some people have, there was nothing more "inherently secure" about blackberrys system vs. just using ssl secured mail servers.

      HOWEVER.. if you we're using blackberrys services in their heyday then the LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT in any shithole country that you had signed up for service in had access to the email server running the bb software.

      the whole idea/why they got popular for a short time was basically just hacking push messaging to work through the gsm network, at about the time it was becoming increasingly irrelevant in the first place, and around the normal megabyte limits.

      futhermore there is a reason why blackberries never made a breakthrough in the market in _ANY_ market where carrier bundling of phones was banned(because hey, that shitty blackberry you had back in the day that did the same things as a 100 bucks ngage did - yeah, that one. it cost you 1200 bucks hidden in carrier fees - NOBODY who saw the real price tag bought them with their own money.. I mean i had one for checking out the sdk and shit but man I would not have bought one with my own money).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    15. Re: translated by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      But that's not what the poster said. Specifically he said: "With patents, you don't sue right away so they can design around your patent and you get nothing, you wait a few years for damages to acrue". He said that you can know that someone has infringed and wait to get more damages. In this case they did enter into negotiations however failure to mitigate damages generally does not look good for a plaintiff.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    16. Re:translated by nonBORG · · Score: 1

      I think most patents cost about 25k to 50k. I have just worked on one (totally different field and not related to software) but the cost of that will be about 30k including the cost of research we have done the patent and the first filing so far. I think it can be done cheaper.

      However the numbers were not actual just to represent a difference of value from two different parties.

      --
      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
    17. Re:translated by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      WOW! The misinformation and inaccurate responses show just how ignorant the public is to what is really going on. Everyone likes to point to the India incident as proof BlackBerry caved and NOBODY seems to realize they were the ONLY company that didn't cave. They fought tooth and nail to keep user data secure while every other company happily handed their keys over. It was only after India said they would kick BlackBerry completely out of one of the LARGEST markets in the world that they relented. And even the information they gave the Indian government didn't guarantee they could access anything without some strong decryption systems.

      And if you had your own BES BlackBerry doesn't even have the keys to give out.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    18. Re:translated by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I think most patents cost about 25k to 50k. I have just worked on ....

      I'm sure there's some costs being missed here --- being able to take some one-off thing you know is Invention and then get a patent on it may be feasible for 50K,
      But most quality patentable things aren't going to come up by accident -- they require a lot of time and labor by experts such as engineers who are highly compensated then with 50K you'd be ignoring all that labor that was required to come up with an invention and Then to consider what patents to file in the first place --- the $50K process starts AFTER a whole bunch of other costs that are part of the costs leading up to the patent registration.

      The whole cost of coming up with the novel product or invention, divided by the number of patents being applied for, effectively is part of the associated costs for getting the
      patent.

      For example: $100 Million in Research and Development costs on a project yielding 10 patents = $10 Million in costs/Patent

    19. Re:translated by nonBORG · · Score: 1

      It seems that you are trying to ascribe the cost of the invention to the patent. Most inventions are made because of seeing a value of the invention in the market or as part of creating a solution that has a market value. Ascribing this to the cost of the patent is misleading, are we also going to put in the cost of the lawyer going to law school? It is not really related. The patent is there to protect the invention but the invention is made prior to the patent and if you make the invention with the intention of making the patent then your whole business case is litigation possibly? Now a patents cost would also be unrelated to it's value. Such as if you patented a medicine that helped a very rare condition in a specific breed of dog it would cost the price of one patent (assuming you already had the invention) but if you had a patent for a medicine that helped a common condition in all dogs then it would cost you the price of one patent. But one has a bigger market potential that the other.

      --
      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
  2. Circling the drain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Blackberry, 2018's SCO! If you can't innovate, litigate!

    1. Re:Circling the drain by xvan · · Score: 1

      I might be wrong but when I searched for RTOSs QNX was the only POSIX offer. Linux RTOS offers were just an RTOS with linux bubbled as an independent task.

    2. Re:Circling the drain by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      > Blackberry, 2018's SCO! If you can't innovate, litigate!

      Speaking of SCO . . .

      TODAY is the 15th anniversary of the SCO vs IBM lawsuit.

      So this farce is now entering it's sixteenth year.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    3. Re:Circling the drain by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      I might be wrong but when I searched for RTOSs QNX was the only POSIX offer. Linux RTOS offers were just an RTOS with linux bubbled as an independent task.

      Well, what's wrong with the Linux RTOS's? I develop on one of those and it makes development a fucking breeze compared to developing on "real" RTOS's. Especially when debugging.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  3. Duh? Maybe If They by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

    hired more technical people rather than lawyers they might be able to keep their network up.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

    1. Re:Duh? Maybe If They by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Blackberry had to get rid of their technical people to pay for the infringement lawsuit they eventually lost over NTP's nonsensical "email over cellular" patent. Crucially, that happened just as the industry was transitioning from phones with enhanced features, to smartphones (phones which could run any generic app). The timing of the lawsuit pretty much took the wind out of Blackberry's R&D sails 1-2 years before Apple introduced the iPhone.

      NTP's patents were eventually overturned. But that didn't help Blackberry because they'd already entered a contract to settle the patent dispute. i.e. Their payment was to stop the lawsuit, not based on the merits of the patent. There was no way for them to get the money back.

      In other words, Blackberry has been reduced to a patent lawsuit-flinging troll because they themselves were the victim of such a troll. Pity them, don't ridicule them. It could just as easily have been you if you'd been in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    2. Re:Duh? Maybe If They by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

      OK, Valid point I did not know that! ;) If I had karma and could use it in a thread I posted in I would bump you up.

  4. Seriously? by Excelcia · · Score: 1

    Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp could make great partners in our drive toward a securely connected future, and we continue to hold this door open to them.

    In who's drive?

    I wouldn't particularly care if Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp were all litigated out of existance, but that is a bit rich.

    1. Re:Seriously? by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp could make great partners in our drive toward a securely connected future, and we continue to hold this door open to them.

      In who's drive?

      I wouldn't particularly care if Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp were all litigated out of existance, but that is a bit rich.

      It's a good point. Add the twit er and you have a bunch of companies that wrote something and have largely become stagnant behemoths. It's about time for some or all of them to fall in order to make way for something better.

  5. Those who can, do... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... and those who can't, sue.

    Blackberry (and before they called themselves that, Research in Motion) had a chance to absolutely own both smartphones and internet messaging, but they decided to play the proprietary licensing game and bleed everyone for every dime they could. Now they are a joke of a company that likely has more lawyers on staff than engineers.

    The shareholders should just vote to liquidate and let them sit in the history books where they belong.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    1. Re:Those who can, do... by UnAmericanPunk · · Score: 1

      But if they were liquidated, then patent trolls would buy all of their IP and then they'd be in court going after the money. So... I guess it's bound to happen?

      --
      Question everything that you've accepted without thinking.
    2. Re:Those who can, do... by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      I, for one, hope BlackBerry succeeds. Let the lesser evils of the world squabble and spend all of their resources in a pointless fight.

      That the greater evil may prevail.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  6. Does Anyone Else Hear That? by organgtool · · Score: 1

    It's the final fart of a fresh corpse.

    1. Re:Does Anyone Else Hear That? by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      I prefer something slightly more melodious. Like the long, drawn-out death rattle of a man suffering from terminal flatulence.

      -- David Lister, Red Dwarf

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  7. What's the patent? by xvan · · Score: 1

    We have a lot of respect for Facebook and the value they've placed on messaging capabilities, some of which were invented by BlackBerry.

    Which capabilities? Using a mobile's phone number as user ID? I agree it was innovative, but I don't think you can patent it.

    1. Re:What's the patent? by fred6666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which capabilities? Using a mobile's phone number as user ID? I agree it was innovative, but I don't think you can patent it.

      I strongly disagree it was innovative. It was the worst idea of the messaging world, a huge step backward.
      I don't want to contact a phone number. I want to contact a person. I don't care if that person doesn't have a phone. I don't care that person switched to another SIM card. I don't care that person moved to another country. The ID shouldn't change as long as that person is the same. And that ID shouldn't belong to a telco.
      Also, why would I want to use my phone to write messages when I have a real keyboard on my PC? I'll use my phone only when I am far from my PC.

      Whatsapp is so dumb that you can't even have two phones sharing the same whatsapp account. Connecting on whatsapp on a new phone will disconnect the old one.

  8. BlackBerry finally gives up by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

    Flurry of lawsuits = last gasp, dying company.

  9. Re:lol by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    How quaint. A company refuses to turn over user data and eventually relents after being threatened with banishment and everyone points at them as a sellout all the while not realizing they never heard anything about THEIR company turning over their data because they did it willingly.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  10. Re:Appsolutely! by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    A little bird told me. It was an angry one.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  11. Re:Translation by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    As I mention elsewhere, today is the 15th anniversary of SCO vs IBM.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  12. Hard to judge... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    ...without knowing for what the patent was.
    But it's awfully predictable how a company that has sold it's brand for 3rd party generic smartphone manufacturing and is being relegated to a part of smartphone history would now resort to becoming a patent troll business, what with it's history:

    - of litigations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    - of giving away the keys to the kingdom: https://www.theverge.com/2016/...
    - writting a tone deaf blog post about it: http://blogs.blackberry.com/20...
    - and then daring to continue labeling their phones as "most secure" for some reason: https://us.blackberry.com/smar...

    This company should've been long dead by now.

  13. Re:Hell yeah by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    Hey. Wait a sec. I never thought of that. I think you are right!

    Yes!!! I hope Blackberry wins big!

    If these three could be shut down, it would improve the intartubes greatly and all over the globe.

    How did Twitter get left out of this lawsuit?

    Please, oh please, file an amended complaint!

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  14. It's the right ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... thing to do.

    Capitalism trumps democracy and republics.

    It's still government by the We The People, but We The People are not affiliated with political parties or the voting system.

    No, we're affiliated with Capitalism through our shareholder relationship.

    We vote by proxy.

    Republicans, Democrats, Independents, alike, are loyal to the Capitalist party, first.

    You and I are the source of any objections we have to that structure.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  15. Darl McBride of Frankenstein? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Blackberry is the new SCO.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  16. Here Are the Patents in question by DishpanMan · · Score: 2

    Blackberry have had BBM as a messenger longer than anyone in the mobile phone business. I know it's easy to make uneducated snap judgements, but in this case it may be wise to wait and see what the findings are before we jump to conclusions on this lawsuit. Since people are piling in Blackberry already without even knowing what patents are in question:

    http://variety.com/2018/digita...

    Patents:

    U.S. Patent Nos. 7,372,961; 8,279,173; 8,209,634; 8,301,713; 8,429,236; 8,677,250; and 9,349,120

    Titles I can find:

    System and method for silencing notifications for a message thread

    Transmission of status updates responsive to status of recipient application

    Handheld electronic device and associated method providing time data in a messaging environment

    Previewing a new event on a small screen device

    User interface for selecting a photo tag

    Method of public key generation

    1. Re:Here Are the Patents in question by vovin · · Score: 1

      Well https://patents.google.com/pat... (May 2007) is either
          - prior art as facebook enabled tagging users in photos in Dec 2005. [https://patents.google.com/patent/US7945653B2/en]
      or
          - Not applicable (The patent is about Facebook for BlackBerry® smartphones).

      That's a set of cajones for ya.

  17. Re:Hell yeah by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

    Hey. Wait a sec. I never thought of that. I think you are right! Yes!!! I hope Blackberry wins big! If these three could be shut down, it would improve the intartubes greatly and all over the globe. How did Twitter get left out of this lawsuit? Please, oh please, file an amended complaint!

    Shitter doesn't actually do much of anything so they aren't much of a target for lawsuits.

  18. Re:Hell yeah by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    Twitter is the POTUS mouthpiece. It is how all official announcements are made. It is how the nuclear launch codes will be sent to start Trump's glorious global nookular war! A bigger legacy than any other president evar!

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  19. Blackberry Officially Announces Death by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Blackberry Officially Announces Death with Troll Lawsuit.

    I am highly doubtful their claim will have anything substantial that wasn't already existent in ICQ back in 1996.

  20. Patents need to die... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    The U.S. patent system really needs to be replaced. These exemplify the need for a massive overhaul.

    ***

    Patent 8,209,634 covers the concept of using icons with numeric badges to signal the arrival of new messages.
    [Haven't email clients been essentially doing this since the 90's?]

    Patent 8,279,173 covers the concept of tagging people in photos using an auto-completing search box.
    [Okay, so now we are claiming ownership of auto-complete. Gee, once again I will point to email clients. They've auto-completed entering recipients for years. This isn't much different. Nothing about this should qualify for a patent.]

    Patent 8,301,713 covers the concept of marking a significant lull in a text message conversation by inserting a timestamp reflecting the time of the next message.
    [So really, the concept they're arguing is that they "hid" timestamps that were close to the prior timestamp. That's an invention? Can one really argue no report printed since the 80's hasn't done something similar? Oh wait, here we've shown the day and all the related records under that day. Same thing. Just a slightly different scope. Move along.]

    Patent 8,429,236 covers the concept of changing how a mobile device sends messages depending on whether they're being actively read by the recipient's device. For example, if updates aren't being read in real time, then the sending device may be able to conserve power by sending messages in batches rather than one at a time.
    [Gee, so batch or on demand. Based on activity. That's never been done in the programming world before.]

    Patent 8,677,250 covers the concept of tying a messaging service and a game application together so that a user playing a game can send messages to contacts on the messaging app that includes updates on the player's progress in the game.
    [Oh, ya.... you're really going to open that can of worms. Do you REALLY want to face Microsoft's lawyers in court BB????]

    Patent 9,349,120 covers the concept of muting a message thread.
    [Muting...oh gee, new new new ability....]

    Patent 7,372,961 covers the concept of generating a cryptographic key by choosing a pseudorandom number and then checking if it is "less than order q prior to reducing mod q." If it is, the key is used. If not, another key is chosen at random and the process repeats.
    [This one I confess I have limited understanding of, but sounds like the simple use of a common math formula, which should not be patentable.]