I have been a loyal subscriber and big fan of Wired magazine and it's various Web publications for more than 10 years. I find myself agreeing with the editors and writers of Wired more often than not, and almost always find merit in their arguments. In other words, I think they're a bunch of smart people.
Robert Strohmeyer, the editor of Wired's Gear Factor blog, has posted a strongly-worded opinion piece regarding the RIM vs. NTP wireless-email-patent-encroachment imbroglio. The bottom line: Strohmeyer believes that, even though NTP has some legitimacy to it's claim, RIM should win the case. His reasoning: NTP's patents are vaguely worded descriptions of obvious services, and RIM has spent a ton of time and dough making the concept into an essential reality.
My wife holds one patent and is applying for a second, so I am extremely sensitive to the rights of patent holders. The entire idea of patent law is to protect the inventor from larger, less-scrupulous entities who would exploit the little guy's genius.
With that said, I come down on Strohmeyer's side on this one. RIM has taken a concept (wireless email) from being a really good, but unexecuted, idea and has, through the application of a lot of money, time, and effort, turned it into a critical component of modern business communication. The working end result, the Blackberry wireless communicator, represents the creative efforts of thousands of people and millions of dollars, all of which were employed well after Tom Campana (the principal of NTP) patented his vague thoughts regarding mobile text messaging.
This is, however, dangerous ground. A victory either way has serious repercussions. If RIM prevails, even though they probably should in this case, patent holders will have to reassess the value of their patents. If NTP prevails, then almost all electronics manufacturers, along with companies in many other fields, will have to pursue patent investigations with far more fervor, not to mention expense - and you know who's going to foot the bill for that, don't you? Why, you are. Thanks so much.
The whole episode has been a thought-provoker with no obvious "right" answer. I think Strohmeyer and Wired make a good case for what they think the right answer is, but there's plenty of room for argument.
Read the whole thing!
No comments:
Post a Comment