Quote:
|
Originally Posted by birick
As a side note, several people have said that the courts need to look at whats right and morale not just the law. The right thing for RIM to do when they found out that they were using someone elses technology to make their product would have been to quickly negotiate an agreement and pay for the technolgy. It would have been cheaper in the long run I think.
|
If someone came to your house one day demanding that they in fact owned your property, under which contained some rare mineral that, due to the passage of time, is worth less now than it did (thereby your living there is making them lose money by the day), and then demanded that you pay them an exorbant amount in damages -- how would you feel?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lapchinj
Are you saying that in order to own a patent I must be doing something with it and am not allowed to sit on it? I can buy real estate and do nothing for years with it. I only have an intention to build on it - someday.
|
It's a pickle isn't it. Obviously, taking such a stance has its own issues to contend with; but faced with such obvious abuse of the system, is there really any other way? And label me stubborn, but I don't see a scenario beyond idea-squatting for someone to invent something, lay intellectual ownership to it, but make no effort in distributing it to the market.