[Frank Castle]

I posted this in general sorry if it's been read, but I didn't get much tractic and wanted to know how other admins are preparing for this possible event?

Management at my company is getting nervous that this "shut down" will occur and I have to draft up possible solutions in the event RIM is down for a period of time.

Personally I don't think it will ever come to that but that's not good enough for our CIO.

Baring all US BB's are down, there are only so many solutions I'd consider.

Good
Seven
Exchange 2003 SP2

Now has anyone rolled these out and felt it offered the same functionality / performance? I have seen the Good dog and pony show more then I can stand and frankly they are expensive. We have close to 2000 BB's and I would hate to deal with figuring out the contract side. Will carriers credit for down time, it's funny no one outside of RIM / NTP are commenting on this.

I'd be interested if other admins are facing this pending "crisis"

[murpheous]

I don't see any shutdowns occuring, also I am not planning for it

[Dustbin30]

Or just have a look at this...

http://news.com.com/RIM+creates+pate...3-5750576.html

[jibi]

This was dated 10/13 from an internal 'update' document. This is only the latter part of the document, concerning contingencies.

While further review by the U.S. Supreme Court is generally uncommon, RIM continues to believe this case raises significant national and international issues warranting further review. As such, RIM is petitioning the Supreme Court to hear this case and asking the CAFC to stay its ruling until such time that the Supreme Court has made a decision.

If the case returns to the District Court for further proceedings, the court will be asked to consider all matters relating to the CAFC rulings, the Patent Office re-examinations, and the settlement agreement announced in March, 2005. RIM would also expect NTP to request a new injunction at that time. Notwithstanding the recent media stories and speculation on this matter, the legal process to secure a new injunction would need to be restarted by NTP and the courts would need to make new decisions on the merits of granting an injunction based on current facts and substantial change in circumstances from the last time it considered NTP’s injunction request. NTP appears however to believe that references to a potential injunction in media articles will provide them with a negotiating advantage by creating pressure on RIM through RIM's stakeholders. RIM regrets any confusion or inconvenience that may have stemmed from this situation and appreciates its customers understanding as this ongoing matter proceeds through the legal process.

While RIM believes that the Patent Office re-examinations and previously unconsidered prior art will carry considerable weight with the courts, RIM has also continued to prepare contingency arguments and plans in case the courts were to decide otherwise: and while RIM cannot predict the actions of an independent court, the court would certainly have the opportunity to consider the Patent Office’s analysis and determinations as factors against issuing an injunction (whereas the original injunction was considered by the courts prior to the Patent Office’s analysis and rejections). Should NTP request a new injunction, the courts would then be effectively asked to decide whether to enjoin a company under patents that the Patent Office is suggesting should never have been issued in the first place.

As a further contingency, RIM also is considering work-around designs to avoid NTP’s patent claims as defined by the courts to date, so as to allow RIM to continue to offer service to its customers without interruption. Details of the workaround remain subject to confidentiality restrictions at this time.

This dispute with NTP is ultimately an industry-wide concern and reflects the nature of the environment in which technology firms operate. It is a lengthy and multifaceted process, but RIM continues to engage in this process in order to protect its interests and the interests of its customers, partners and other stakeholders. RIM looks forward to sharing future updates on the status of this legal dispute; however, there are extensive confidentiality restrictions and legal strategy issues involved that prohibit RIM from sharing many details. With that in mind, RIM will continue to share information where appropriate.

And a bit on the USPTO proceedings.

Apart from the court proceedings, there have been other developments related to the NTP patents. Shortly after the 2002 District Court trial, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“Patent Office”) announced that he was initiating a re-examination of 5 NTP patents (4 of which were litigated against RIM) because his Office had identified a “substantial new question of patentability” regarding those 5 patents. RIM requested that the remaining 3 NTP patents (1 of which was litigated against RIM) also be re-examined and the Patent Office agreed. As a result, all 8 NTP patents (5 of which were litigated against RIM in total) were ordered to be re-examined by the Patent Office. As of September 29, 2005, the Patent Office had issued First Office Actions in relation to all 8 NTP patents and all of the claims in all of these 8 patents have been rejected by the Patent Office as not being patentable. Further, all of the 16 claims asserted against RIM in the litigation were rejected on grounds not considered in the District Court trial. This comprehensive rejection by the Patent Office certainly corroborates RIM’s initial stance about the invalidity of these patents.

It is also extremely relevant to note that starting in February of this year, the Patent Office modified its re-examination process to apply a higher degree of scrutiny to First Office Actions. As a result, rejections in First Office Actions must now be supported by the unanimous decision of a panel of three senior patent examiners, which is the same criteria previously required only for Final Office Actions. As such, overcoming these First Office Actions will be substantially more challenging for NTP in comparison to a typical patent re-examination under the old process (which did not require panel review). At this juncture, based upon past Patent Office practice, it is reasonable to expect that the rejections should continue to a Final Office Action.

[guinda35]

Thanks for the info Jibi. I doubt there will be a shut down though. I just hope this confusion doesn't delay the 8700. Of your three alternate sources, Good sounds good to me. RIMM is in a bind for sure. If they're shut down, my office will migrate to Good, and we might not be back.

[Dan-BB]

Whats the plan when NTP goes after Good ?

[Frank Castle]

From what I've "heard" Good ponied up and paid NTP so they shouldn't be next in line. We have Good coming in next week for another dog and pony show so it should be interesting and I will be pressing them.

One good thing they offer is clustering.

[corey@12mile]

Good is a company in trouble, which is unfortunate because they actually do have a rather nice product. Until Good can figure out how to get it's warez on durable handhelds, it will always be in the RIM shadows.

I don't think anybody should really be worried about US networks having to shutdown their RIM connections. RIM really is in good shape with regards to this lawsuit, and only stand to benefit further from this point on. The deal was made, NTP got greedy and now they are going to lose big time because the US courts seem to have had enough of NTP's greed in this case. As far as the courts are concerned NTP made the deal for $450M and once they saw how fast RIM jumped on that number they must have thought it was too easy and went back to appeals for more... Like a friend of Ted Rogers says... they are sucking and blowing at the same time...

RIM won't get shutdown in the US... it's just typical over-reporting by our wonderful media... I swear in the media its a competition of who can exagerate the most to try and tweak peoples eyes... all of this RIM shutdown is waaay over-played, waaay blown out of proportion. I can almost guarantee that most of the people in the courtroom... judges, lawyers, maybe even NTP people themselves have Blackberry's... do you really think the judges are going to shut it down?

[ace_2005]

Good is a company in trouble, which is unfortunate because they actually do have a rather nice product. Until Good can figure out how to get it's warez on durable handhelds, it will always be in the RIM shadows.

Corey not to start any flaming but I was curious about this comment. How is Good in trouble?There are more ruggedized devices that are hitting the pipeline as we speak. IMO its a great idea for these companies to be planning for an interruption in in their BB services. Who really knows what will happen with this NTP case.

Also more US Government Officials are getting provisioned with Goodlink. Some want the newest and greatest and the Mother of this technology (RIMM) can only get but so much better ie the new 8700.

We all rely heavily on this technology and would find it rather hard to adapt to this change if mobile email was removed from our hands. Good is well positioned in this market and will succeed because people love Good. It makes Good even more attractive when device makers are pre-installing devices with Goodlink and users get the same look and feel of Outlook, cross devices and platform.

I am open to your opinions on this and will refrain from flaming this thread if I am not flamed.

ACE

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by jletendre

From what I've "heard" Good ponied up and paid NTP so they shouldn't be next in line. We have Good coming in next week for another dog and pony show so it should be interesting and I will be pressing them.

One good thing they offer is clustering.

Good did sign a licensing agreement with NTP back in March

http://news.com.com/RIM+rivals+ink+l...3-5611431.html

[jibi]

The companies also said NTP has invested an undisclosed amount in Good.

"This license (between Good and NTP) means that when the injunction goes into place with RIM, people using Good's service will still be able to wirelessly receive their e-mail," said Kevin Anderson, an attorney with Wiley Rein & Fielding representing NTP.

thats humorous, at best.

[teamcrn]

you know whats funny..i could care less who gets the job done as long as it gets done..i need my email bottom line and a stable platform..because i refuse to use mobile windows products..i am use to buying a new device about every year or 2 so if "goodlink" is the answer i will be signing up...lmao

[Good_Guy]

Wow...

Research In Motion Loses Bid to Halt U.S. Lawsuit Proceedings
Oct. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Research In Motion Ltd. lost a U.S. Supreme Court bid to block proceedings that might result in a nationwide shutdown of its BlackBerry e-mail service.

U.S. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. rejected the Canadian company's request to halt trial court proceedings while it pursues high court review of a patent-infringement finding.

Research In Motion now has the option of filing the same request with a second justice. In the meantime, the case goes back to a trial judge in Richmond, Virginia, who will consider ordering a halt to U.S. sales and service.

Closely held NTP Inc., a patent-licensing firm based in Arlington, Virginia, sued Research In Motion in November 2001. A year later, a federal jury in Richmond found that Research In Motion used NTP's e-mail technology without permission. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld part of that finding.

NTP says it plans to ask U.S. District Judge James Spencer, who presided over the 2002 trial, to reinstate an order that would halt BlackBerry service for non-government users.

Waterloo, Canada-based Research In Motion also has said it will ask the judge to force NTP to abide by a $450 million settlement that fell apart in June.

Even as the courts deal with the lawsuit, Research In Motion is asking the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to cancel the NTP patents. In an initial finding, the patent office rejected all of the NTP patents although NTP has a chance to respond.

The cases are NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion Ltd., 03-1615, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Washington), and NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion, 01cv767, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Richmond).



To contact the reporter on this story:
Greg Stohr in Washington at .
Last Updated: October 26, 2005 13:16 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...8&refer=canada

[teamcrn]

i swear all this court stuff is silly..this stuff could be tied up for years.. because its in civil court..well i got my eye on a couple devices...just not sure who will offer push email service..and doesnt rim have a back up plan.. i can see them not having a back up system if the lose all together

[Good_Guy]

Actually, it is not civil court, it is federal. As for the back-up system, RIM has been touting that for awhile and it will be interesting to see how it works and any effects it han performance/security.

[blkberryboy]

Originally Posted by Good_Guy

NTP says it plans to ask U.S. District Judge James Spencer, who presided over the 2002 trial, to reinstate an order that would halt BlackBerry service for non-government users.

Intresting...I guess the "Common Man" gets worked over again.

Just like always, NTP comes late to the party and want the biggest piece of cake. RIM offered a settlement but NTP said that wasnt enough. I guess 450million isnt enough...

[teamcrn]

i am sorry you are right it is federal but it is a non criminal matter so there are alot of outlets and procedures..sort of like a deathrow inmate..it could take years

[NJBlackBerry]

And what happens if BB service is shut down? NTP will end up with much less or nothing at all. NTP doesn't make a competing product. Lawyers (and don't even try to defend them). Extortion is such an ugly word.

[Bear]

Kind of makes me wonder what all of those BlackBerry users in Congress, the Executive and Military are gonna do if there shutdown happens.

[Good_Guy]

Originally Posted by Bear

Kind of makes me wonder what all of those BlackBerry users in Congress, the Executive and Military are gonna do if there shutdown happens.

They will be fine. The shut down would be for non-government users.