"Date set for Blackberry ban hearing"

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>

Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers or,
at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.

[MORE]

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR ALT.INTERNET.WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FAQ_for_alt.internet.wireless>

In article <K27Cf.547871$(E-Mail Removed)>, John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
><http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>
>
> Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
> hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers or,
> at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.
>
> [MORE]
>

Most likely will go to a cash settlement of some sort now that all options
are exhausted. Question is what will it do to rates for consumers.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Rico wrote:

> In article <K27Cf.547871$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>><http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>
>>
>> Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
>> hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers
>> or, at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.
>>
>> [MORE]
>>
>
> Most likely will go to a cash settlement of some sort now that all options
> are exhausted. Question is what will it do to rates for consumers.

All the options aren't exhausted yet. Sort of. It's still in front of the
patent courts, is it not? And the patent rulings so far have all been in
favor of RIM. I'd predict RIM holding out for the government to intervene
to fast-track the patent process.
--
derek

In article <8edna3-(E-Mail Removed)>, Derek Broughton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Rico wrote:
>
>> In article <K27Cf.547871$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>><http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>
>>>
>>> Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
>>> hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers
>>> or, at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.
>>>
>>> [MORE]
>>>
>>
>> Most likely will go to a cash settlement of some sort now that all options
>> are exhausted. Question is what will it do to rates for consumers.
>
>All the options aren't exhausted yet. Sort of. It's still in front of the
>patent courts, is it not? And the patent rulings so far have all been in
>favor of RIM. I'd predict RIM holding out for the government to intervene
>to fast-track the patent process.

The initial ruling went against RIM that's why they appealed. True the
SCOTUS effectively sent it back to the appeals court, but they had decided
to shut down RIM in terms of the patient claim. RIM will have to make some
sort of cash deal. The only legal solution open to them at this point. The
Congress is not going to step into this in a timely enough manner to save
RIM's bacon. Even if they want to, Congress moves too slowly; note only
Congress can alter patent law -- See US Constitution Article 1, section 8:
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing
for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries;

This is the basis of the Patent Office, and as can be seen it falls into
that section of the Constitution that describes the power of the Congress.
This comes a few lines after borrowing money....<wink>

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

On 1/26/2006 3:06 PM, Rico wrote:
> In article <8edna3-(E-Mail Removed)>, Derek Broughton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Rico wrote:
>>
>>> In article <K27Cf.547871$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>
>>>>
>>>> Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
>>>> hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers
>>>> or, at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.
>>>>
>>>> [MORE]
>>>>
>>> Most likely will go to a cash settlement of some sort now that all options
>>> are exhausted. Question is what will it do to rates for consumers.
>> All the options aren't exhausted yet. Sort of. It's still in front of the
>> patent courts, is it not? And the patent rulings so far have all been in
>> favor of RIM. I'd predict RIM holding out for the government to intervene
>> to fast-track the patent process.
>
> The initial ruling went against RIM that's why they appealed. True the
> SCOTUS effectively sent it back to the appeals court, but they had decided
> to shut down RIM in terms of the patient claim. RIM will have to make some
> sort of cash deal. The only legal solution open to them at this point. The
> Congress is not going to step into this in a timely enough manner to save
> RIM's bacon. Even if they want to, Congress moves too slowly; note only
> Congress can alter patent law -- See US Constitution Article 1, section 8:
> Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing
> for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
> respective Writings and Discoveries;
>
> This is the basis of the Patent Office, and as can be seen it falls into
> that section of the Constitution that describes the power of the Congress.
> This comes a few lines after borrowing money....<wink>
>
> fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Can't RIM appeal the ruling and then introduce the Norway document to
the court?

Dan

In article <W4bCf.28$(E-Mail Removed)>, Dan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On 1/26/2006 3:06 PM, Rico wrote:
>> In article <8edna3-(E-Mail Removed)>, Derek Broughton
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Rico wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <K27Cf.547871$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>>> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/26/rim_ban_hearing_date_set/>
>>>>>
>>>>> Research in Motion (RIM) will appear in court on Friday, 24 February to
>>>>> hear if it must close its Blackberry push email service to US customers
>>>>> or, at the very least, make them implement an upgrade.
>>>>>
>>>>> [MORE]
>>>>>
>>>> Most likely will go to a cash settlement of some sort now that all options
>>>> are exhausted. Question is what will it do to rates for consumers.
>>> All the options aren't exhausted yet. Sort of. It's still in front of the
>>> patent courts, is it not? And the patent rulings so far have all been in
>>> favor of RIM. I'd predict RIM holding out for the government to intervene
>>> to fast-track the patent process.
>>
>> The initial ruling went against RIM that's why they appealed. True the
>> SCOTUS effectively sent it back to the appeals court, but they had decided
>> to shut down RIM in terms of the patient claim. RIM will have to make some
>> sort of cash deal. The only legal solution open to them at this point. The
>> Congress is not going to step into this in a timely enough manner to save
>> RIM's bacon. Even if they want to, Congress moves too slowly; note only
>> Congress can alter patent law -- See US Constitution Article 1, section 8:
>> Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing
>> for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
>> respective Writings and Discoveries;
>>
>> This is the basis of the Patent Office, and as can be seen it falls into
>> that section of the Constitution that describes the power of the Congress.
>> This comes a few lines after borrowing money....<wink>
>>
>> fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.
>
>Can't RIM appeal the ruling and then introduce the Norway document to
>the court?
>
>Dan

Appeal to who? The evidense phase of this is long past, that was during the
original trial period, the appeals are arguing points of law, not the
'facts'.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Rico wrote:

> In article <8edna3-(E-Mail Removed)>, Derek Broughton
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>All the options aren't exhausted yet. Sort of. It's still in front of
>>the
>>patent courts, is it not? And the patent rulings so far have all been in
>>favor of RIM. I'd predict RIM holding out for the government to intervene
>>to fast-track the patent process.
>
> The initial ruling went against RIM that's why they appealed. True the
> SCOTUS effectively sent it back to the appeals court, but they had decided
> to shut down RIM in terms of the patient claim. RIM will have to make some
> sort of cash deal.

But, aiui, the rulings _against_ RIM are based on the fact that there _is_ a
patent, which the courts can't just overturn. The actual patent rulings
though, where RIM has appealed the validity of the existing patents, have
all gone in RIM's favor, so far.

> The only legal solution open to them at this point. The
> Congress is not going to step into this in a timely enough manner to save
> RIM's bacon. Even if they want to, Congress moves too slowly; note only
> Congress can alter patent law

From RIM's viewpoint it shouldn't need any change in law - an order to
process all the claims and counterclaims expeditiously (so as not to
inconvenience all the bureacrats who rely on their Blackberries) would do
the job. It seems to me that just needs a command from the cabinet
secretary responsible for the Patent office. Of course, the Patent office
could end up supporting the important patents, and RIM would still be on
the hook, but they seem confident that in the end they won't lose.
--
derek