RIM does not really patent a concept, they patent an industrial design. It may be that this is the wrong type of intellectual property tool to use (given that "Industrial Design" is IP that can be defended - just ask Coke), but it's what they've chosen to do. This has very little to do with preventing competitors from making similar featured devices, and has everything to do with preventing competitors from knocking off their IDs. Even the "thumb-keyboard" was specific enough that they only sued Handspring (now Palm) for the first Treo, that was essentially a carbon copy of their 957 keyboard design. Issuing a patent like his in the US is useful 1) because other companies around the globe will accept that a US patent might actually be something that is novel (oddly enough) though they may be more strict in their review of it and (more importantly) 2), it prevents people like Meizu from selling their knock-offs in the US, or anywhere else where the patent is enforced. This is important because for a high percentage of things, a device that is patented in the US is *not* patented (or otherwise protected) in China, where it can easily be reverse-engineered and replicated. Those knock-offs are not technically speaking illegal while sold within China, but would be if exported due to patent infringement.
Long-term, the "Patent Lawsuit Land" is really just a big poker table, where the size of your stack is what you use for leverage to win deals with your competition. Just ask IBM.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Badonkadonk @ Mar 4th 2008 8:25PM
RIM does not really patent a concept, they patent an industrial design. It may be that this is the wrong type of intellectual property tool to use (given that "Industrial Design" is IP that can be defended - just ask Coke), but it's what they've chosen to do. This has very little to do with preventing competitors from making similar featured devices, and has everything to do with preventing competitors from knocking off their IDs. Even the "thumb-keyboard" was specific enough that they only sued Handspring (now Palm) for the first Treo, that was essentially a carbon copy of their 957 keyboard design. Issuing a patent like his in the US is useful 1) because other companies around the globe will accept that a US patent might actually be something that is novel (oddly enough) though they may be more strict in their review of it and (more importantly) 2), it prevents people like Meizu from selling their knock-offs in the US, or anywhere else where the patent is enforced. This is important because for a high percentage of things, a device that is patented in the US is *not* patented (or otherwise protected) in China, where it can easily be reverse-engineered and replicated. Those knock-offs are not technically speaking illegal while sold within China, but would be if exported due to patent infringement.
Long-term, the "Patent Lawsuit Land" is really just a big poker table, where the size of your stack is what you use for leverage to win deals with your competition. Just ask IBM.