![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about NTP, Inc. or its patents. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about NTP, Inc. or its patents at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
TFA states " conviction for patent infringement." Meh. This wasn't a criminal case. -- Gtcaz 06:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there a discussion of items in the patent somewhere? I can personally think of 3 prior art that could refute subsections of NTA patent. -- Hans Schulze 2007/09/12
According to Slashdot,
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/12/1956202
An anonymous reader writes to tell us that following in the wake of their patent suit against Research in Motion (RIM), NTP has filed suit against Verizon, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, and T-Mobile for infringing on several patents. All of the patents in question relate to the delivery of email on mobile devices. "Five of the eight patents being used in the telco cases were the subject of NTP's 2001 patent suit against Research in Motion, the maker of the BlackBerry. In November 2002, a jury found that RIM infringed upon NTP's patents. The case continued to make headlines until 2006, when RIM agreed to pay NTP a settlement of $612.5 million, nearly four years after RIM had first been found guilty of infringing on NTP's patents."
Maybe someone should add this to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.39.78.68 ( talk) 20:42, September 12, 2007
I don't have the time or expertise (or energy) to go through the patents, but in the late 80s, the Los Angeles Fire Department was implementing a wireless email system (part of a wireless hookup of every fire department vehicle) to their central servers. That wireless system was based on a Motorola radio with antenna on Mt. Hollywood. Users could "email", or "chat", query a central server to query information about various LA addresses: hazardous waste manifests, reasons for prior paramedic calls, etc. At the time, I don't believe there was anything special about the LAFD system -- I believe it was mainly a cut and paste of what various police departments were doing.
It would be very helpful if someone could look through the various patents and let us know what years the prior art needs to come from. Maybe someone should add this to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.39.78.68 ( talk) 20:42, September 12, 2007
The article appears to suggest the key issue of the Telenor documents is whether they can be considered publications but this is unsourced. Trying to find out what the Telenor documents are, I came across some sources albeit non RS [2] [3] [4] suggesting the key issue was whether the documents were authentic or had been modified. Nil Einne ( talk) 09:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
What is NTP's web site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.198.241.130 ( talk) 15:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
www.patent-trolls-r-us.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.30.196.54 ( talk) 15:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about NTP, Inc. or its patents. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about NTP, Inc. or its patents at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
TFA states " conviction for patent infringement." Meh. This wasn't a criminal case. -- Gtcaz 06:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there a discussion of items in the patent somewhere? I can personally think of 3 prior art that could refute subsections of NTA patent. -- Hans Schulze 2007/09/12
According to Slashdot,
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/12/1956202
An anonymous reader writes to tell us that following in the wake of their patent suit against Research in Motion (RIM), NTP has filed suit against Verizon, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, and T-Mobile for infringing on several patents. All of the patents in question relate to the delivery of email on mobile devices. "Five of the eight patents being used in the telco cases were the subject of NTP's 2001 patent suit against Research in Motion, the maker of the BlackBerry. In November 2002, a jury found that RIM infringed upon NTP's patents. The case continued to make headlines until 2006, when RIM agreed to pay NTP a settlement of $612.5 million, nearly four years after RIM had first been found guilty of infringing on NTP's patents."
Maybe someone should add this to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.39.78.68 ( talk) 20:42, September 12, 2007
I don't have the time or expertise (or energy) to go through the patents, but in the late 80s, the Los Angeles Fire Department was implementing a wireless email system (part of a wireless hookup of every fire department vehicle) to their central servers. That wireless system was based on a Motorola radio with antenna on Mt. Hollywood. Users could "email", or "chat", query a central server to query information about various LA addresses: hazardous waste manifests, reasons for prior paramedic calls, etc. At the time, I don't believe there was anything special about the LAFD system -- I believe it was mainly a cut and paste of what various police departments were doing.
It would be very helpful if someone could look through the various patents and let us know what years the prior art needs to come from. Maybe someone should add this to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.39.78.68 ( talk) 20:42, September 12, 2007
The article appears to suggest the key issue of the Telenor documents is whether they can be considered publications but this is unsourced. Trying to find out what the Telenor documents are, I came across some sources albeit non RS [2] [3] [4] suggesting the key issue was whether the documents were authentic or had been modified. Nil Einne ( talk) 09:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
What is NTP's web site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.198.241.130 ( talk) 15:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
www.patent-trolls-r-us.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.30.196.54 ( talk) 15:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)