Will RIM Resort to Patent Trolling to Boost Business?

[exfileme]

RIM may resume its patent troll duties to earn a little extra cash.

Will RIM Resort to Patent Trolling to Boost Business? : Read more

 

[internetlad]

The Title, the Sub-title and the first paragraph all state the exact same thing, why the hell does Kevin Parrish get paid to do this again?

Seriously every article is "troll" this or "nuke" that, the guy should run a blog, not be a legitimate journalistic writer.

If I could filter out Greuner and Parrish's articles I think the quality of my toms experience would increase tenfold.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

RIM still has business?

 

[stygian]

I don't think this is trolling. RIM makes products with the patents it owns. It was once the main player in the mobile market and still remains a major player in certain enterprise environments (hospitals and banks for instance). Enforcing your patent rights when you are an active member of the market is not trolling.

P.S. I agree with internetlad.

 

[stygian]

I don't think this is trolling. RIM makes products with the patents it owns. It was once the main player in the mobile market and still remains a major player in certain enterprise environments (hospitals and banks for instance). Enforcing your patent rights when you are an active member of the market is not trolling.

P.S. I agree with internetlad.

 

[invlem]

Probably one of the worst articles I've read here.

Indeed i agree with stygian.

There is a vast difference between RIM, a company who actually uses its patents to produce products and NTP who has never once released anything of use to the market.

RIM's patents allow it to compete in the market place and build on its technology, companies like NTP simply sue the world and to what end, they never actually make anything of use, or move technology forward in any way.

 

[jordan009]

Apple is the patent troll of all time.. Rim can't compete with their level of troll.

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]jordan009[/nom]Apple is the patent troll of all time.. Rim can't compete with their level of troll.[/citation]

I beg your pardon! As an owner of more shares of RAMBUS stock than I care to admit, I must take offense at this remark. I'm just one successful frivilous lawsuit away from hitting the mother load.

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]internetlad[/nom]The Title, the Sub-title and the first paragraph all state the exact same thing, why the hell does Kevin Parrish get paid to do this again?Seriously every article is "troll" this or "nuke" that, the guy should run a blog, not be a legitimate journalistic writer.If I could filter out Greuner and Parrish's articles I think the quality of my toms experience would increase tenfold.[/citation]
Harsh. Not defending but perhaps something more constructive is in order?

 

[wildkitten]

Ok, how is holding a patent they developed in house and then going after those violating those patents considered patent trolling?

Yes, companies formed for no other purpose than to buy up obscure patents just to sue others are true trolls and something needs to be done. But let's not go calling legitimate companies defending their own developed products trolls.

Let's not swing the pendulum to the other side where every idea and invention can be used by anyone because this will only stifle innovation. No one will invest time and money to research something new if they don't have a right to exclusivity to their invention for a period of time and that's just as bad if not worse.

 

[dontknownotsure]

cracked.com taught me to doubt any article that even the authors are so unsure the title ends with a question mark.

 

[schnitter]

I stopped reading at the 3rd "Patent Trolling to Boost Business" for fear the author was about to troll me with by the end of the article.

 

[internetlad]

[citation][nom]Halcyon[/nom]Harsh. Not defending but perhaps something more constructive is in order?[/citation]

On the off chance that Kevin Parrish actually reads these comments, i'd provide this constructive criticism. This is a semi-legitimate tech news site, I would suggest avoiding internet slang (parrish) or biased, unbacked "Opinion" articles (Greuner).

I would say write as unbiased an article as possible. Resist the urge to spruce it up by shoehorning your opinion that they're "trolling" or that this is in any way bad business ethics because not only are you ruining your own journalistic integrity by spinning it the way you yourself see it, but you are taking away the neutrality needed for readers to form their own opinions.

If you can't separate yourself from the article while writing it, that's a conflict of interests, and if that's a big no-no in all other professions, why should internet journalism be excluded?

Also, while i'm on the topic, all writers for toms' and it's sister sites should be required to proofread their work before submission, erroneous spelling and grammar should not be acceptable when there are so many tools and resources that can be used to prevent it. A typo in a major news site's article would be a huge gaffe, yet they appear in every other article on toms' sites.

I'm not a writer, i'm not a journalist, I don't get paid to do this, but i do enjoy reading tech articles on toms' as of late. I always knew the writing here was less than professional at times, it wasn't until i started reading the articles at sites like CIO (dot com)
that i realized how unacceptable this is.

Just my two cents.

 

[gm0n3y]

A lot of comments here are saying that because RIM actually makes products that any future patent litigation isn't 'trolling'. I can see where they are coming from, however, Apple also makes products and they are considered by most to be a pretty big patent troll.

 

[internetlad]

[citation][nom]gm0n3y[/nom]A lot of comments here are saying that because RIM actually makes products that any future patent litigation isn't 'trolling'. I can see where they are coming from, however, Apple also makes products and they are considered by most to be a pretty big patent troll.[/citation]

The difference is that RIM patents technologies, whereas apple patents ideas and shapes.