AppleInsider Staff
NTP, a patent holding operation that produces no products, dismissed its suit against a number of companies in the technology and communications sectors as the group settled out of court for undisclosed financial terms, reports Bloomberg.
The settlement brings an end to the suit first filed against AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile in 2007 and laterexpanded to include Apple, Google, Microsoft, HTC, LG and Motorola in 2010. At issue were eight patents credited to NTP co-founder Tom Campana, who the company claims is the "inventor of wireless e-mail," and related to e-mail delivery over wireless networks. Campana, who died of cancer in 2004, was a prolific inventor of communications patents of which NTP holds 50.
“Each of the parties in this arrangement are in some way making use of NTP’s, of Tom Campana’s, original wireless e-mail invention, although they’re at different levels of the industry,†said NTP lawyer Ron Epstein. “Some are providing wireless services, others e-mail, others the handset, but they all are getting the same license.â€
Epstein is referring to the variety of companies involved in the suit, which came after NTP successfully leveraged the patent against BlackBerry maker RIM in 2006. Emboldened by the win, NTP sued the U.S. telecoms and handset makers but ex parte requests to review the patents in question delayed a ruling.
Apple's iOS Mail app. | Source: Apple
At the time of the suit's expansion in 2010, NTP co-founder and patent lawyer Donald E. Stout claimed the use of "intellectual property without a license is just plain unfair." He went on to say, "unfortunately, litigation is our only means of ensuring the inventor of the fundamental technology on which wireless e-mail is based, Tom Campana, and NTP shareholders are recognized, and are fairly and reasonably compensated for their innovative work and investment. We took the necessary action to protect our intellectual property."
Out of the 13 companies that settled, HTC alone issued a response saying it was “pleased to see this issue resolved reasonably and without further litigation."
-m.jpg)
Malcolm Owen
Stephen Silver
Christine McKee
Charles Martin
Marko Zivkovic
William Gallagher
Andrew Orr
30 Comments
How much more evidence do we need that the US patent system is fundamentally broken? People have been using wireless mail since the days of carrier pigeons. In the past years it was discovered that there were descriptions of wireless email "prior art" documented in Norway that predate NTP's "invention" of it. The US patent office failed to find the documented prior art when it granted the
patent trollcompany its wireless email patents. Hopefully that discovery helped defang NTP enough to render NTP's latest monetary settlements significantly smaller than the HALF BILLION dollars theyextortedwon from RIM.Prediction: The guy pointing out the brokenness of the US patent system will not get piled on and excoriated in this thread.
Prediction: The guy pointing out the brokenness of the US patent system will not get piled on and excoriated in this thread.
Well, he's right that it's "fundamentally" broken, even though it isn't completely broken. The fix is to go back to requiring an implementation with a patent submission, which will cut down on the ability of leeches like NTP to morph the thousands of useless patents they buy into whatever they need them to mean. Further reforms, to completely eliminate patent troll like NTP and Intellectual Vultures, while a desirable goal, would be tricky to accomplish, but, if they can be hobbled to the point where trolling becomes unprofitable, that would take care of most of the problems.
And, no, just in case anyone is confused, requiring an implementation for a software patent is not the same as protecting it with copyright. The implementation isn't about the exact code, it's about a concrete instantiation that shows exactly what your "machine" does, and how it does it, precisely defining your patent. If you can't build this, you haven't invented anything, all you have is an idea.
Prediction: The guy pointing out the brokenness of the US patent system will not get piled on and excoriated in this thread.
Broken or not, it is good to see that those who steal other people's tech are finally brought to justice.
When Apple steals other people's patented technologies, they usually drag things through the courts before they finally settle. It is good to see Apple manning up early in the game for a change.
It seems to me that there are two types of patent violations (or IP violations in general): one where the offending party sees something the protected party does and copies it and one where the "offending" party creates something that turns out to be covered by someone else's patent. I believe it's the latter that that Carmack was complaining about in his famous quote. I'm sure that happens all the time, and it speaks to the fact that oftentimes the bar for what should be able to be protected is too low. That is, obvious "next steps" are patented by the one guy or one company moments ahead of dozens of others.
In other words, there is "stealing" and "patent infringement." Without knowing the details of any particular case, it's not always obvious which it is.