RIM granted handheld email patent - clobbers Handspring

[Jason Dunn]

<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/27205.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/27205.html</a><br /><br />Wow - this patent may have dire consequences for the entire PDA world! I'm all for companies protecting their inventions, but this seems like such a generic patent - any handheld device designed for email and a thumb-based keyboard? What about keyboards that attach? This isn't good news in any way, and looks like yet another move that is typical for companies on the financial ropes - if you can't survive based on a good product, produce a patent and extort the industry. &lt;sigh><br /><br />"On Tuesday Research in Motion was granted a patent for a "hand-held email device", and waited just 24 hours before clobbering rival Handspring Inc. with a writ. Have a close look at the patent [6,452,588, here], because it's sure to cast a very long shadow over the handheld wireless and cellular businesses in the coming months. (Coyly, RIM didn't mention this in its press release yesterday, and the first wire reports this morning haven't twigged that this is a new grant). <br /><br />The 45-page filing, submitted last July, is for a "Hand-held e-mail device with a keyboard optimized for use with the thumbs … In order to operate within the limited space available on a hand-held electronic device, the present invention optimizes the placement and shape of the keys, preferably using keys that are oval or oblong in shape, and that are placed at angles designed to facilitate thumb-typing. The angles at which keys on either side of the keyboard are placed is [sic] complimentary."<br /><br />Source: PDA Gerbil

[TypeMRT]

If this holds water, then the future of mobile devices is at risk. I know, it's a little strong, but come on. Unless Handspring claims that their keyboard is optimized for index fingers they may consider themselves lucky to ONLY pay a royality to RIM. By RIM's account my SE T68, or most new phones, are in the same boat. What about that new software keyboard that others have raved about?
I shouldn't complain too much, a couple of my friends are in law school and will need jobs when they get out :wink:

[Ed Hansberry]

First Palm gets sued over the unistroke alphabet and now HS gets sued over their keyboard. Pretty soon PalmOS devices will come with a Post-it note pad so they don't violate input patents. :wink: :lol:

[mhynek]

If you read the patent clearly, it plainly states that the buttons must be oval in shape. This is only one small portion of this very narrow patent. I believe that in the long run, this will only be a factor for devices that are practically identical to the original RIM device. I highly doubt that this patent will have any effect, whatsoever, on ppc's. However, it did produce the same humor as the Sunday comics, so kudos for that!

my 2 cents.

[Kemas]

I am not understanding how handspring got hit? Because of their new Palm Device... doesn't look much like a RIM to me.... It does seem to be that this patent is a little loose..... Besides, a keyboard? Give me a break.. the patent on a keyboard ended a long time ago. Besides, RIM has been around for several years now... why the wait?

[Take1]

This does sound like RIM is simply trying to eliminate the competition and generate some undeserved income. This patent also tries to snag the thumb wheel (a.k.a. Clie) as well. This will stifle the nacent always-on e-mail market initially, until better input solutions arise. Does this mean the Danger device is now history? How about the Motorola e-mail pager? This could really give RIM a monopoly in this sector of the handheld market.

I suspect they will also attempt to go after Sony over the thumbwheel and might even try to sue over the NR-70 keyboard if they really need the cash (allthought the layout and shape are not similar).

It seems ever since Rambus embarked on their 'sue for fun and profits' extortion scheme, other companies have seen this as a legitimate way to make money. Too bad -- I purposely avoided using Rambus memory in my last PC upgrade (DDR instead) as a result of this shady business practice and will have the same bias against RIM if they get stupid with their patenet claims.

[John Cody]

I've done a lot of research into Patents (having applied for one myself).

The claims are the most important/protective part of a patent. There are two general types of claims:

1) Independent claims - which are kind of a stand-alone statement of what [idea] you want to protect - The independent claims in this patent are 1,11,17,23,24, and 42.

Independent claims are a complete entity. Even if it mentions ten different things/attributes, it is still treated as one statement. You can only infringe on an indepedant claim if your idea/device uses ALL ten of the things/attributes mentioned in the independent claim. For example, if a claim mentions how to create a keyboard using 5 parts, but you are able to create a keyboard that uses only 4 of those same parts, then you probably won't be infringing on the independant claim because your keyboard does not include *everything* in the 'claimed' keyboard. However, if your keyboard uses seven parts, and five of them are the same as in the claim, then you will probably be infringing the claim because your keyboard encompasses *everything* in the claim.

2) The other type of claim in a 'DE'pendant claim, which rely on 'IN'dependant claims. Because DEpendant claims rely on INdependant claims, if you are able to get-around one or more of the details of the INdependant claim, then any DEpendant claims based on it are usually not applicable. Basically, if you wreck (get around) the foundation (the independent claim), then everything that the foundation supported (dependant claims) comes crashing down along with it.

So, generally speaking, the power of a patent is in the INdependant claims... and you will notice that most, if not all, of the INdependent claims mention *very specific* attributes for a keyboard (i.e. "arranged in an arc", " each oblong shaped letter key is tilted"). So, if you create a device in which the keyboard keys are not arrange in an arc and not tilted in a common angle, then you probably won't be infringing on this patent.

...Just my quick initial opinion of the patent

[Paul P]

Good luck to RIM in its quest to prevent competition from flourishing and convincing the government that stopping companies from 'copying' their technology will not lead to a decline in tax revenues.

[Ravenswing]

It seems ever since Rambus embarked on their 'sue for fun and profits' extortion scheme, other companies have seen this as a legitimate way to make money.

I think you have to go back a bit further. The computer industry has always been a mass of patent suits. The earliest ones I remember are the Apple vs. Atari suite, the Apple vs. Miscrosoft (Excel, I believe) and RSAs suits against Phil Zimmerman over PGP.

IMHO, very few of the patents we are now seeing in the industry should have been granted, and very few would be granted in the UK where the requirements for inovation are higher. Unfortunately, because some plank in the US grants a patent on "a novel method of transmitting text via electrical signals" we all get charged 10 cents a letter to send emails :roll:

You'll note that the US doesn't take our dumb patents seriously. BT (that's British Telecom) recently lost a patent fight which theoretically gave them a patent over hyperlinked documents (i.e. the whole of the web). But that was a UK patent, so it doesn't count. :wink:

[GregWard]

I'm not sure how US patent law works but, assuming it's broadly the same as the UK, I think RIM may have fallen into the classic trap here. Many businesses "over-specify" their patent claim. The right - but VERY expensive - thing to do is to employ specialist patent lawyers. The really, really wrong thing to do is to get your Techies to write the application. The former shoot for as "loose" a definition as they can get away with (eg "e-mailing on the move") - the latter are so proud of HOW they accomplished their wonderful development that they put ALL the details in (eg "oval keys").
From a users point of view the former is a real threat to "free trade" the latter is pretty much insignificant ("damm - we'll have to use square keys then - oh well").

[Unreal32]

Well, this justifies me dropping my Skytel service, doesn't it? It's done. Goodbye, RIM... I hope you enjoy losing customers over this one. What a load of crap. I hope Handspring wins the suit and kicks your legal @$$.

[Ed Hansberry]

I know this is a discussion board and meant to spur discussion, but it is the funniest thing to see PDA enthusiasts talk about patents. I saw tons of this when Xerox hit Palm with patent infringement on the Unistroke alphabet too. Patent law is very complex, and while it remains to be seen what the court will do on RIM's claim, it is pretty absurd to go "oh, too broad. RIM should have had patent lawyers" or "What? the treo doesn't look anyhing like a Blackberry" unless you are a patent lawyer or have extensive experience in patents. Looking at pictures doesn't begin to cut it.

[DrtyBlvd]

Don't forget the "We own Hyperlinks" patent arguments....

[jmulder]

Don't forget the "We own Hyperlinks" patent arguments....

IMO, there's a world of difference between the RIM situation and BT's. Regardless of where the patent is held (UK or US, Ravenswing), RIM received their patent and immediately (24 hours is pretty immediate in my book) filed suit against Handspring. BT held their patent and did not defend it until hyperlinks were as ubiquitous as snowflakes in a blizzard.

Odds are that Handspring knew it was going to be infringing on the patent, but banked on the US patent office denying the patent. Odds are also pretty good that RIM warned Handspring that they were infringing on a pending patent, but RIM could not take any action until the patent was granted.

I used to work for a company in the Casino Gaming industry that was in RIM's position. We warned our competitors about patents pending, they assumed we wouldn't get it, we did and sued them, and we forced our competitor to pull all of its infringing products out of its customers' casinos.

Needless to say, this didn't make us many friends among our competitor's cumsotmers, but it did propel us into a position of power in the industry.

-Jim

[PJE]

I can see RIM's point - the Handspring TREO keyboard is very similar to that on the BlackBerry... It all depends on how much RIM wants.

If RIM's position is to stop competition then RIM deserve to go bust. If on the otherhand they set a fair royalty rate for truely inovative technology (25c per machine seems fair) then I don't see the problem. Only time will tell.

I think RIM is getting nervous that they were the first into the market with a product and are about to be eaten alive by all the new PDA and SmartPhones.

Being first into a market - especially when it was already present in other forms - does not, in my opinion allow you to own the technology.

It is strange that RIM is only going after small companies...

My 2c

PJE

[kfluet]

Have you ever worked really hard on an idea only to have a business competitor copy you once you have it all worked out? I have and it is infuriating.

While I don't particularly like the RIM/Blackberry units, I have to say the first thing I thought when I saw the Handsprng when it came out was, "Wow, that really looks like the Blackberry. They are going to get their asses sued."

RIM, without question, came out with an innovative and new input method. I am not suprised that they are defending the pantent that protects their invention. The fact that it took a long time for their patent to be granted before they could take legal action isn't RIM's faut.

Of course I will be very unhappy if RIM chooses not to licence their design to other companies. The Snap-N-Type I am typing this into my iPAQ with wouldn't be the same.

[mjgroff]

RIM has every legal and moral right to protect their designs from companies that would rather copy a good idea, than come up with one of their own. Given the timeline here, it is totally clear Handspring copied RIM's form factor. This is not a case of two companies coming up with the same idea at the same time. If the Treo keyboard does infringe RIM's patent, RIM wont be able to choose any "punishment" it likes. The court will decide what is fair. As a public company, RIM owes it to its shareholders to try and get as much as they can. If we don't like how this turns out, we should blame the court.

With respect to the comment about RIM letting the techies write the patent, I am sure they use a crack team of patent lawyers. They have won more tha one patent infringment law suit in recent history. I am sure they would have gotten a much more general patent on the keyboard if they could get away with it. The fact that the patent is so specific shows that the U.S. patent system works (at tleast some of the time).

I say this as a fan of the free market economy. I am not a fan of RIM's devices. I would take my never-connected Casio e125 over a blackberry any day.

M.G.