RIM Shot III: Taking One For the Team
March 6, 2006 | Filed Under Technology, In the News
RIM CEO Jim Balsillie is entitled to wax a bit poetic when he writes a $612.5 million check to NTP.
According to MSNBC and other press reports, Mr. Balsillie used this phrase when describing the settlement. Just one question: which team?
As to understanding the timing of the settlement, the RIM press release made the real reason clear: things were finalized the same day RIM announced preliminary 4Q results, which ended the next day. Full 4Q results for RIM will be announced on April 6, 2006. A crusade? Defending a principle?
How about it “must be the money?” (link to Nelly lyrics could attract RIAA and get me in hot water with law.com).
But lest RIM let the weekend settlement party extend into a new week, the New York Times reports this morning that there may be storm clouds on the horizon for BlackBerry.
RIM Shot II: Nothing But Net
March 3, 2006 | Filed Under Technology, In the News
Well I was off by one day…
Today RIM and NTP buried the hatchet and settled their long-running patent dispute for the sportly amount of $612.5 million. BusinessWeek has the details. The WSJ Law Blog had it first.
For RIM, a few days ago they said they were on a “crusade” to fight the parasitic NTP.
I think it went down something like this:
Judge Spencer might have put the word out that he was going to rule soon. The message to both sides–are you feeling lucky, Pilgrim?
Or perhaps “Deal or No Deal?”
RIM and NTP almost settled last year at $450 million. NTP supposedly wanted $1 billion at the end of 2005. So NTP offers to split the difference, and call it a day at $725 million. RIM says no, we have to have some movement our way. Half the way between $450 and $750 million gets you $587.5 million. NTP says we have to pay our lawyers, so it’s topped up $25 million to *bingo* $612.5 million.
When you are motivated, you can settle a nearly ten figure dispute in less time than it takes to do better than bust-out-retail at your local Chevy dealer.
While I initially thought the case would have been settled a few months ago, there’s nothing like the prospect of an adverse order to get people focused on the task at hand.
What’s next for NTP? I presume one hell of an office party.
What’s next for RIM and BlackBerry? I’d take 10% of the difference between the $1 billion and the settlement–$387.5 million–and start to carpet-bomb all forms of media. You say something clever like:
BlackBerry: why settle when you can have the real thing?
Then RIM should take straight aim on the fundamental weakness BlackBerry wanna-bees like the Treo 700w and the Motorola Q have in the corporate market: they both sport cameras that could violate the acceptable use guidelines of many enterprise users of cellphone/PDA devices.
Somewhere the GCs of RIM and NTP may be breathing a small sigh of relief.
And the outside counsel of both are gently weeping.
RIM Shot
March 2, 2006 | Filed Under Tactics, Technology, In the News
The raging dispute between RIM and NTP over BlackBerry has been prominent in the news for weeks.
Some of the reports use the recent federal court hearing in Richmond, VA as a pretext for railing against the alleged failings of the patent system. The Wall Street Journal did this yesterday in an op-ed ($) piece. Matt Buchanan cogently rebuts some of the “let’s blame the lawyers” tone of that editorial; as do the Patent Baristas.
I think what’s really going on is that NTP has a good case, and RIM knows it. RIM could have settled the case for cents on the dollar years ago (reportedly +/- $20 million). RIM tried to settle for $450 million last year, which fell apart. NTP’s price had allegedly increased to $1 billion late last year.
In trial vernacular, when RIM can’t argue the facts (jury verdict), and can’t argue the law (attempted nine-figure settlement), they bang on the podium.
Two other signs that this case isn’t just about legal principles come from a W$J article last week (sorry, no link available). The first takes a bead on the mind of RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie:
Inside RIM’s headquarters in Waterloo, Ontario, Mr. Balsillie’s battle strategy is being driven by indignation at the U.S. patent system and a determination to defend a principle. Mr. Balsillie, like many high-technology executives, says U.S. patent laws let parasitic little firms hold up innovative companies for ransom. “Is it appropriate to play Russian roulette with the system every day in the courts, where one claim can shut down the whole industry?” he asks.
The other is from an industry observer (Ken Dulaney) doing what they do best, observing:
The belief among RIM staff that the company has been wronged “borders on religion,” Mr. Dulaney says. “They’re going to lead the crusade.”
In my GC experience, when a company starts framing commercial disputes with terms like “principle” or “crusade,” inside counsel brace for one wild ride and outside counsel buy waterfront properties.
At last Friday’s hearing, U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer expressed frustration that the case hadn’t settled. In the meantime, Treo is gaining on BlackBerry. Have you noticed that Verizon’s ads for the Treo 700w are everywhere, including on primetime shows like “Lost?” (Thus implying that one would help you get “Found?”).
RIM is probably banking on the high cost of switching as a built-in protection against competitors like Treo. Press reports this morning indicate that the cost per user to switch could exceed $800.
But if Judge Spencer really wants a settlement, he has a rather large club at his disposal: enter an order granting NTP’s motion for an injunction against the infringing use by RIM of BlackBerry, and make it effective in 31 days.
Then it’s go time. RIM implements the workaround, or pays NTP the going rate for settlement.
What’s more likely is that RIM appeals the order and the case drags on. I am amazed, however, that RIM continues to ensure that their media branding revolves around words like “shutdown” and “workaround.” All part of a crusade, I guess.
Client Calls from the Ether
March 1, 2006 | Filed Under Law 2.0, Technology, New Services
How would you like to have clients calling you out of the blue?
The New York Times has reported that Google (who scared the Street yesterday) is testing a new ad service that allows search users to initiate a conversation:
Starting late last year, the site began showing green phone icons next to selected advertisements that appear with search results. When the icon is clicked, the user is prompted to enter his or her phone number. The phone will then ring, with the business on the other end of the line…
When I first saw this and wondered about legal applications, I thought mostly of lawyers looking for cases where a potential client is searching for “dog bite” or “slip-n-fall.” But what if some enterprising corporate lawyer or firm started buying search terms like “section 703(b) allocations” or “superfund de micromis buyouts.” In other words, search terms that would be more likely to be used by potential clients with money rather than by a young kid in his parents’ basement.
This Google capability could put more pressure on Thomson/West (findlaw.com) or LexisNexis (Martindale/lawyers.com) to figure out quickly what their lawyer search capabilities really want to be when they grow up.
On a related front, chronicle of web 2.0 TechCrunch reports (scroll down) that the start-up Ether is being launched tonight by Ingenio, who has already a leader in pay-per-call.
According to TechCrunch editor Michael Arrington (who is a lawyer, by the way), Ether would work like this:
Service providers set up an account by providing some personal information and a phone number that they would like to be called at. Any service that can be provided over the phone is a perfect match for Ether. “Sellers” set their price, from free to anything (on a per minute or per hour basis). They can tell Ether the hours they are willing to take calls. Every seller is issued a toll free phone number (with a dedicated extension), which forwards to their phone.
Robert Scoble wonders how people would use Ether. I think lawyers will use services like Ether (and Google) to find clients–or perhaps more accurately to have clients find them.
Lawyer and law firm advertising may never be the same.
Technorati tag: law2.0
Search
Powered By
Links
| ||||
 | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
