I know little about this case, but what you've just said is very unlikely.
If NTP's patent had indeed come "well after precedent and patented obviousness," the judge - no matter how incompetent RIM's lawyers - would have thrown NTP's suit out long ago on the grounds that the patent covered prior art.
There are huge problems with the patent system, but allowing companies to obtain and sue on patents for inventions that already exist isn't one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
I know little about this case, but what you've just said is very unlikely. If NTP's patent had indeed come "well after precedent and patented obviousness," the judge - no matter how incompetent RIM's lawyers - would have thrown NTP's suit out long ago on the grounds that the patent covered prior art. There are huge problems with the patent system, but allowing companies to obtain and sue on patents for inventions that already exist isn't one of them.