|
I think I must be missing something, or maybe I don't understand because I don't own a blackberry. What confuses me is that the majority of the folks here see the patent holder as the bad guy.
I always thought that if you had a fantastic idea for a better way to do something then you should get your idea patented. Then you can either put your idea into a product or you can license/sell your idea to someone else to produce (or you can strike a deal with a patent holding firm since they are the experts on such things). Isn't that how it works? Isn't that what happened here? Isn't that why, as a condition of employment, I had to sign an agreement with my company stating that my ideas (while employed by them) were company property?
Now, if you are a producer who is set to release a lifestyle changing product on the world, aren't you supposed to insure that you aren't infringing on someones patent before you release your hot new item? Shouldn't you have a license for the patented technology before you start selling it?
Now, lets assume that you honestly overlooked the fact that were infringing on someones patent and they came to you to resolve the issue. Don't you have a responsibility to compensate them for your accidental theft of their technology, and shouldn't you have an agreement with them to continue using their patent? If you think they are trying to hold you hostage shouldn't you issue your newly developed, non-infringing solution to show that you are sincere in your efforts to resolve the issue?
OK, I'll stop but there is one more thing I don't understand... If you are the US Patent Office why would you issue invalid patents??? Anyone know how many patent office employees currently use Blackberrys? :? :?:
|