[smithm565]

And here you go, further deterioration and another demonstration of the absolute horrendous performance and execution by this company whereby next in line is that they will likely be writing down a large portion of their patent portfolio from lack of pursuing and collecting revenue from these overpaid assets. BlackBerry has become an absolute joke of a company - the but of all jokes.

https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019...berry-patents/

Snap, Facebook on Brink of Invalidating Several BlackBerry Patents
If U.S. District Judge George Wu sticks with his Sept. 5 tentative ruling, it will be good news for Facebook and even better news for Snap.

A Los Angeles federal judge is poised to take a big bite out of BlackBerry Ltd.’s patent infringement suits against Facebook Inc. and Snap Inc.

In a tentative summary judgment order issued Thursday, U.S. District Judge George Wu ruled that two mobile messaging patents BlackBerry is asserting against both companies are ineligible for protection under Section 101 of the Patent Act. Wu concluded that the two patents, which BlackBerry says represent improved methods for deploying targeted advertising, are merely “dressing up the abstract concept of collecting and compiling information.”

Snap, Snapchat’s parent company, also persuaded Wu to knock out two additional patents asserted only against Snap, on locating nearby “action spots” where other mobile device users are gathering. That would leave only two patents in BlackBerry’s case against Snap, with one of them already on life support after Snap previously invalidated all of the independent claims.

Since none of the tentative ruling in the FB/SNAP case has been published in the docket, curious to know if the lawyers leaked this info or if the hearings are open to the public?

Also, what good is it of BB requesting a jury trial if the judge can invalidate all their claims before ever going to trial?

[app_Developer]

Since none of the tentative ruling in the FB/SNAP case has been published in the docket, curious to know if the lawyers leaked this info or if the hearings are open to the public?

Also, what good is it of BB requesting a jury trial if the judge can invalidate all their claims before ever going to trial?

He won’t invalidate all of the claims. The ones that survive will go in front of a jury (unless a settlement is reached of course)

Again, the defendants have a right to question the validity of the claims. That’s routine in these cases.

[Redzinaldas]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...300913576.html

BlackBerry to Announce Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter Results on September 24, 2019

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...300913576.html

BlackBerry to Announce Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter Results on September 24, 2019

Not expecting much as the Cylance integration is going to take some time. But hopefully they will be able to give more guidance on it's impact to revenues, as it's becoming part of most aspects of their product lineup at this point.

[EchoTango]

Not expecting much as the Cylance integration is going to take some time. But hopefully they will be able to give more guidance on it's impact to revenues, as it's becoming part of most aspects of their product lineup at this point.

Agreed. However, I suspect we will see continued higher expenses diluting the earnings to nothing. Again, we will hear "wait another few quarters and all will be wonderful".

In other words...same old same old.

[smithm565]

StarLink reinforces its presence at GITEX 2019

..hosting BB/Cylance, among group of 18 strategic vendors

https://www.zawya.com/mena/en/press-...0190910113041/

[Corbu]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...300915321.html

BlackBerry Helps Automakers Manage the Total Car Acoustic Experience

[smithm565]

"with QNX AMP 3.0, chimes and safety alerts have been added to notify the driver of an impending threat or vehicle condition, alongside a complete speaker management package, providing OEMs with a one-stop acoustics shop that can scale from base level radios to premium audio."

[Bacon Munchers]

....my point...

For all the discussions on internal fraud and Prem/Chen speculated collusion with intentional mis-dealings, doesn't it make more sense that it is outside forces pushing the stock down to go after Prem and what BB represents? Prem is still involved in a stock manipulation suit against some powerful players on wall street and BB is his largest stock holding. Also, there are some powerful forces behind FB and what they stand for, namely the opposite of protecting user privacy.

Exactly.
I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, but one need not look farther than what you stated, with the addition of which big players are invested in competing companies of BlackBerry - i.e. Crowdstrike and Mobil Iron.

To an earlier point, I personally know a guy who got burned $250k with BlackBerry stock when it was at the all time high. I'll bet there were many who lost their shirts back then. People don't forget, but also don't seem willing to go through the paces of understanding the new BlackBerry either. It's like the name is....

In the meantime, I still have it as my largest investment chunk by far and am totally convinced that the company is slowly positioning its self for success, as do many here.

[Bacon Munchers]

So Prem and Chen are the bikers or the cops?

... How about bike cops?

Boom! We did it.
Nice.

[Bacon Munchers]

Since none of the tentative ruling in the FB/SNAP case has been published in the docket, curious to know if the lawyers leaked this info or if the hearings are open to the public?

Also, what good is it of BB requesting a jury trial if the judge can invalidate all their claims before ever going to trial?

I am uneasy about this going to a jury, because (maybe) 1 out of the whole lot uses a BlackBerry and thus, would be possibly withholding bias against.

[Corbu]

5:38
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/executiv...er-ceo~1775951

BNN Bloomberg spoke with Ralf Speth, chief executive officer of Jaguar Land Rover

[Chuck Finley69]

... How about bike cops?

Boom! We did it.
Nice.

LMAO

[smithm565]

I am uneasy about this going to a jury, because (maybe) 1 out of the whole lot uses a BlackBerry and thus, would be possibly withholding bias against.

I apologize for the long-winded answer, but was doing some reading last night on IP litigation and found some interesting details that are worth a read, with links to full documents. Short answer, I would be nervous if I was FB, SNAP, or TWTR and the judge lets any claims head to trial:

BB requested a jury trial when they filed their initial infringement suit, in all 3 cases. The cases were routed into “The Patent Pilot Program”, which utilizes special judges and how they all got transferred to Wu. This is pretty much a watered-down jury trial path, where the judge decides much of the case (ie. Markman Hearings), then if it makes it to trial, will direct the jury what they can decide on.

A few statistics (why BB chose jury trial):
“The popular perception that there is a significant difference in a patentee's success rate when juries decide patent claims is supported by statistical data taken from 1983 to 1999. When juries decided patent suits, the patentee "win" rate exceeded 68%, while when a judge adjudicated patent trials, the patentee "win" rate was closer to 51%. This demonstrates a statistically significant predictor of which party will prevail based on who adjudicates the trial. However, the empirical data also demonstrates that patentees have an advantage over alleged infringers no matter who decides the issues of fact. Overall, when the data set was categorized by substantive issue, e.g., validity, enforceability, infringement, willfulness, and damages, seven statistically significant trends emerged:
[1] patents are more likely to be held valid than invalid;
[2] patents are more likely to be held enforceable than unenforceable;
[3] patents are more likely to be held infringed than not infringed;
[4] patents are more likely to be held willfully infringed than not willfully infringed;
[5] patents are more likely than not to be held valid, enforceable, infringed, and willfully infringed when adjudicated by a jury;
[6] patents are more likely than not to be held valid, enforceable, and infringed when adjudicated by a judge; [and]
[7] either party has an equal chance of winning on the issue of willfulness when adjudicated by a judge.

When multiple issues are decided at the district court level, the same party tends to prevail in a sweeping, all-or-nothing fashion. When validity and infringement were both at issue, juries found for the same party on both issues 86% of the time, but judges found for the same party 74% of the time. With respect to multiple claims, juries resolved all claims in favor of one party 87% of the time, while judges resolved all claims in favor of one party 72% of the time. Therefore, the adjudicator is a statistically significant predictor of whether a party will prevail on all issues in cases with multiple claims and multiple issues.”

- https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/view...1&context=ripl
- 2018 Statistics (see slide 7&8): https://www.ipwatchdog.com/wp-conten...tion-study.pdf
------

Patent/IP case info between Judge/Jury:
“in patent litigation, courts have largely recognized the right to a jury trial in cases where the patentee seeks money damages and denied it in cases where the patentee only seeks an injunction or declaratory judgment.”
“Even if the claim triggers the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial, the jury will not answer all of the questions to be determined; some will be decided by the court. The determination of whether or not a question is for the jury is largely based on the distinction between questions of law and questions of fact—the law-fact distinction.”

Basically, if it is a question of law = Judge decides; question of fact = jury decides

“In Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., the Supreme Court applied the historical-functional inquiry and held that patent claim construction is a question of law to be answered by the judge rather than by the jury. By so holding, the Court reduced the jury’s role in patent litigation by taking away from it one of the most important components of a patent dispute. In assessing the functional considerations, the Court concluded that a judge, by virtue of his or her training and discipline, would be more likely to give proper interpretation to “highly technical” patents than a jury and would be in a better position to ascertain whether an expert’s proposed definition fully comports with the instrument as a whole. As a result, many district courts since the Markman decision in 1996 have conducted “Markman hearings” as part of their standard pretrial-hearing practice to interpret the meaning of patent claims. Relying on evidence presented by both parties, including “experts skilled in the art,” judges determine how to construct the claims at issue.”

“Only about 3% of all patent cases are actually tried by juries. . . .With no more than about 62 patent jury trials per year that reach trial”

- https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/...27&context=clr
----

Info on defendant use of “motion for summary judgement” to attempt to prevent trial:
“In a patent infringement trial conducted before a jury, the issue of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents is decided by the jury, not by the judge. The jury may decide that there is (or is not) infringement under the doctrine of equivalents without fully explaining the reasons for its decision. On appeal, it may be very difficult to reverse such a jury decision.
Consequently, a fundamental objective of many alleged infringers in U.S. patent litigation is to prevent the issue of infringement by equivalents from ever reaching the jury. One technique for accomplishing this objective is to request that the issue of infringement by equivalents be decided by the judge prior to the time of trial. This may be achieved by filing a so-called "motion for summary judgment", in which the alleged infringer attempts to persuade the judge that there is no need for a trial on the issue of equivalency because the relevant facts are undisputed and a proper application of the law of equivalency to the undisputed facts compels a conclusion of non-infringement.”

- https://corporate.findlaw.com/intell...under-the.html

[Corbu]

Great stuff, mate. Thanks for sharing!

[rampagingpanda]

Thank you smithm565!

[Sigewif]

JPMorgan Chase buying BlackBerry shares.

https://technewsobserver.com/news/20...ysebb.html/amp

[Redzinaldas]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...300915704.html

DENSO and BlackBerry Launch Integrated Automobile HMI Platform

[Corbu]

For background, original BB/DENSO collaboration announcement from December 2017:
https://www.denso.com/global/en/news.../20171214-g01/

[Corbu]

From the PR:

"SUBARU is the first vehicle manufacturer in the world to commercially deploy the jointly developed digital cockpit platform, featuring BlackBerry QNX Hypervisor. From September 2019, automobile manufacturers around the world will sequentially launch new car models with the integrated HMI."

[smithm565]

From the PR:

"SUBARU is the first vehicle manufacturer in the world to commercially deploy the jointly developed digital cockpit platform, featuring BlackBerry QNX Hypervisor. From September 2019, automobile manufacturers around the world will sequentially launch new car models with the integrated HMI."

Great point.

Hard to underemphasize the importance of this match up with DENSO and the statement above.

Here is a statement released by Ford last year:

"DENSO’s products and systems are an important part of nearly every major vehicle make and model around the world. From air conditioning compressors and retrofittable driver-status monitors to autonomous services and electrification, DENSO is developing innovative solutions that are shaping the future of transportation."

https://www.aftermarketnews.com/dens...obal-supplier/

[Seadog83]

From the PR:

"SUBARU is the first vehicle manufacturer in the world to commercially deploy the jointly developed digital cockpit platform, featuring BlackBerry QNX Hypervisor. From September 2019, automobile manufacturers around the world will sequentially launch new car models with the integrated HMI."

Wow, this is actually spectacular news, I feel more than what's written. While we can't really expect much this Q, and I've learned the hard way many times not to get my hopes up, it does imply that those dozens of wins that have been happening for the last 2+ years will finally start paying dividends in the form of actual and increasing revenue.

An extremely nice reprieve after my disgust with the market on Monday. CRWD triples from their mid June IPO, while BB continued it's pernicious rot. Why? Because Blackberry. Monday CRWD got punished to the tune of 10%, and BB got to share in that if you assume the decline was all focused on the fraction that Cylance represents. Why? Because they're both in the same industry. You share in the downs. The one way valve that is Blackberry...

[EchoTango]

From the PR:

"SUBARU is the first vehicle manufacturer in the world to commercially deploy the jointly developed digital cockpit platform, featuring BlackBerry QNX Hypervisor. From September 2019, automobile manufacturers around the world will sequentially launch new car models with the integrated HMI."

Let's just hope all this technology wasn't sold at $1 or $2 per car and the attendant licensing deal better reflects a true market price. Chen is well aware of the historical financial impact as he lamented many times about the David Dodge deals which saw multi-year QNX licenses literally given away for free.

At least this is one of the much touted at the time development deals which is now bearing some fruit.

[fanBBRY]

Fireworks!!!

[Bacon Munchers]

I apologize for the long-winded answer, but was doing some reading last night on IP litigation and found some interesting details that are worth a read, with links to full documents. Short answer, I would be nervous if I was FB, SNAP, or TWTR and the judge lets any claims head to trial:

Thanks Smith. I'll browse through your data when back later today.
Hope this proves to be right! My portfolio depends on BlackBerry wining.