BlackBerry sues Snapchat parent Snap, claiming patent infringement

BlackBerry has recently made it known that it considers suing for patent infringement to be a 'profit center.' Actually, this seems to have been the case going back a few years. For example, who can forget the company's victorious defense of its physical QWERTY keyboard when it won a judgment of $860,600 back in 2015 from Typo. The latter firm sold a case for the iPhone that doubled as a physical keyboard...
This is a discussion for a news article. To read the whole news, click here


1. Crispin_Gatieza

Posts: 3122; Member since: Jan 23, 2014

If you're winning patent lawsuits it means you're right. Respect IP, pay your licensing fees and you won't find yourself in court, it's that simple.

4. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Is it really that simple though? I don't really care for Snapchat, but this just screams desperation. It's not a coincidence that blackberry would be targeting social networking platforms with BBM losing market share and all.

7. Nimbus

Posts: 442; Member since: Apr 02, 2018

Obviously you care about snapchat otherwise u haven't criticise against bb like for snapchat & other social networks apps,i bet u one of the teenager who use snapchat daily.

13. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Obviously you are wrong. I don't care about Snapchat. What I do care about is BlackBerry becoming a patent troll just because they are not the same company they once were.

11. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

Exactly, Crispin. You wanna play? Then you gotta pay, especially if you wanna play with someone’s IP without their consent. That’s not desperation, that’s protecting what’s yours.

14. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

If you ask me, I think pay to play is a ridiculous thing to say. If you look at the list of things Snapchat supposedly violated in the article, you will see that they could practically apply to ANY electronic device. That's too broad of a reach for BlackBerry to cry foul over. That's not protecting what's yours. That's just being a patent bully.

17. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

Only those that don’t understand the term “pay to play” would find it ridiculous. If you actually read the list of things Snap violates concerning BlackBerry’s IP, there is no way that you could logically think BlackBerry is wrong here. They are protecting what’s theirs as opposed to allowing anyone to use their IP without consent. That’s not being a bully, that’s smart business. Only those with business acumen will understand that.

22. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Doesn't matter how you put it, pay to play is a ridiculous thing to say. You shouldn't have to pay anything for something that is pretty broad. Their IP isn't the concept of social media via electronic communications. Their IP is BBM. They are mad because they are losing market share with BBM and their only solution is to turn to litigation. That is the definition of being a patent bully.

24. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

No it’s not ridiculous. You should pay for any IP that has been innovated and patented by someone else. Only those not aware of how patents/IP work, or those who are all for companies stealing the hard work of others would say that. The IP in question is related to messaging and how these messages are sent, received, etc. It haa nothing to do with them being mad about anything other than others using their inventions illegally. They offered to talk about a solution before litigation, as they always do. Snap refused. This is the definition of protecting what’s yours. Oracle and Apple’s methods are the definition of patent bullies, not BlackBerry.

29. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

No, it is ridiculous. First of all, why mention Apple? I thought they weren't in competition with what BlackBerry is offering or was that just another instance of BlackBerry fans pushing the goalpost back? Truth be told, no company should be exempt from being accused of being a patent bully if they are bullying. That includes Apple. Not sure what you were getting at by mentioning them. Of course they offered a solution, a solution that involves a monetary solution, something that blackberry is trying to accomplish since they aren't pulling enough cash to cover their other services and offerings. No one wins when patent bullies resort to litigation.

33. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

No, it’s not ridiculous. The thought of it being ridiculous is what’s ridiculous. I mentioned Apple to prove a point obviously, of which I did. BlackBerry and Apple not being in competition with each other clearly has nothing to do with it. But leave it to you to take things way out of context in order to further your fabrication as fact agenda. Truth be told, no company should be exempt from being sued for illegally using another’s IP. Not sure why you’re so blind to this fact. Of course they offered a monetary solution for Snap. Should they not have? Snap should not be allowed to use ANYONES IP for free. And newsflash, BlackBerry’s latest ER proves your “aren’t pulling enough cash to cover their other service and offerings” absolutely wrong. No one wins when companies opt to steal IP as opposed to innovating themselves.

43. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Yeah, to prove that you are a hypocrite. I'm not taking anything out of context. If Blackberry isn't competing against Apple, which is your admission btw, then there's no reason to even add them to the discussion. Feel free to keep moving the goalpost back. No company should be allowed to use patent bullying to go after generic patents that are used by everything. Obviously they need to pull cash sources from other sources since they are so eager to litigate for stupid crap. You just don't want to admit the truth. And you have yet to prove how they stole this imaginary patent that blackberry supposedly has. I think Google should arm themselves and sue BlackBerry for using Google's IP. I think they should sue BlackBerry for violating the Motorola patents they have that blackberry doesn't. See how that works now?

46. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

No, it was to prove your hypocrisy. And guess what? Mission accomplished. And yes, you are taking things way out of context. I can add whoever or whatever I want to the discussion to prove my point. Feel free to keep taking things out of context and changing the facts to suit your false narrative. No company should be allowed to use another’s IP without their consent. Period. Obviously you don’t understand how to read an earnings report, or you’d know that BlackBerry doesn’t need to pull money from any other source. You just can’t handle the truth. And you have yet to prove that the patent is imaginary or that it wasn’t stolen. Lol, Google isn’t going to sue BlackBerry. That’s wishful thinking on your part. And Motorola pays BlackBerry a fee for their patents, which would fall to Google to pay if they now own the patent. Sorry, but not sorry burst your fallacy filled bubble. See how that works now? ;D

48. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

See, that's the type of attitude that makes you childish. You mean you can say whatever you want because you're not going to buck from your statements regardless how wrong they are. I'm not taking anything out of context. No company should be allowed to just sue anyone just because they think they have a right to something that's a standard. You know this, so why are you still trying to defend this? If they didn't, then they would not have the need to litigate just to get another cash flow going. Don't take what I said and regurgitate it. That is getting annoying. You don't know that. The fact that it can happen scares you. Blackberry knows not to overstep their boundaries because Google would shut them down before they can even get a lawsuit off the ground. That's just more wishful thinking on your part. No I don't. Just another way of you be annoying.

52. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

LMAO! He says I’m childish, but he has no proof, just lip service, about BlackBerry being guilty, much like the time when you said BlackBerry delayed the KEYᵒⁿᵉ launch because of the Note 8. Pot, meet kettle. All you’re doing is spewing the same old repetitive, unproven nonsense because you have issues with BlackBerry. When you find actual proof as opposed to just being a bothersome little guy that just like to cause trouble whenever an article is posted about BlackBerry, look me up. Until then, you’ll be met with a “see this comment and all of my other comments in this article.” Not gonna waste my time anymore beyond directing you to see comments since you’ve absolutely nothing new, truthful or substantial to add, jut a whole lot of bothersome lip service.

2. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

I will first say this: BlackBerry, PLEASE don’t ever become like Apple and sue for generic things like the name “App Store”. That being said: Looking at the full scope of patents involved, it’s clear that this isn’t an unwarranted lawsuit, especially since BlackBerry actually offered Snap a chance to talk this out before going with a lawsuit. Snap chose not to have talks with BlackBerry. It’s also clear that BlackBerry only goes after those that are infringing on actual parents of theirs, and they only take you to court after you refuse talks out of court or those talks break down. Typo was a prime example. NO company should be allowed to get away with infringing on another companies IP. And before someone brings up the term “stifling innovation”, you’re clearly not innovating if you are illegally using another companies IP that they put in all the hard work for. You’re stealing. And that’s an indisputable fact.

30. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Well BlackBerry is already trying to sue for generic features. 8,326,327 - System and method for determining action spot locations relative to the location of a mobile device 8,296,351 - System and method for pushing information to a mobile device You can't sit here and tell me that BlackBerry has a patent for the above on something that is standard for any electronic device? You can't tell me those aren't generic.

34. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

There are clearly different methods that these “generic” features can be implemented, and Snap clearly chose to illegally use the IP of BlackBerry to do it. You can’t sit here and tell me that they didn’t. And I can obviously tell you that BlackBerry has a patent for this, as it’s listed as one of their patents.

3. samgsam

Posts: 147; Member since: Mar 24, 2017

Snap's CEO has become so arrogant that he doesn't see the users of its app as 'users' anymore. He's taking everything for granted. I hope blackberry wins the lawsuit. F_ck snapchat.

5. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

This is definitely "stifling innovation" whether you want to admit it or not. BlackBerry has launched a lawsuit against Facebook for messenger. Blackberry can't adapt to the time, so instead they turn to litigation. This is just as bad as the whole Oracle and Java thing. Companies like Oracle and BlackBerry are using litigation as a crutch to make money instead of trying to stay relevant by being creative with innovative new ideas and services. I'm not saying that you should go out and copy something a company is already doing, but to go out and do your own thing and make it better. If we continue to allow petty companies like blackberry to sue for every little thing, then we are never going to have anything innovative. What's the point if you're just going to get sued for it?

9. Subie

Posts: 2344; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

But will you get sued if you properly licence the IP you need from the willing owner? Once licensed, then you can build off it and "go out and do your own thing and make it better" It's only stifling innovation if one party is unwilling to properly use and build for themselves, or license out their patented tech... IMO

10. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

Exactly, Subie. Some people don’t know when to apply the term “stifling innovation”. This isn’t stifling innovation at all, this is protecting ones innovations. They just tnink that because it’s BlackBerry, they are wrong for doing it. It also still boggles my mind how anyone could say BlackBerry doesn’t innovate, or uses litigation as crutch when BlackBerry has been innovating in the IoT and security fields. People like him would rather others steal IP and use it freely (which is absolutely ridiculous) as opposed to paying for its use. If we continue to allow petty companies like Snap, FB and others steal IP and use it without any consequences, then real innovation will be stopped, as those actually doing the hard work and innovating will no longer do so.

15. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

How can you license something that could be considered standard? That's like asking Ford to license the design of a car. I could see if Snapchat was trying to borrow features that are prevalent in BBM, but if you look at the stuff it allegedly violated, you will see that they are way too broad and could be applied to nearly anything electronic. I understand what you are getting at though. You aren't trying to be a fake genius or anything. Unlike some misguided and misinformed people, I'm not suggesting that companies steal other's IP. But don't cry patent infringement if it's something that is so broad that it could cover many things. I don't care about IoT, which btw BlackBerry will probably try to sue companies like Phillips for the Hue or Nest for being IoT, or security fields or any other cop out excuse to give Blackberry a free pass.

19. Subie

Posts: 2344; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

Car companies definitely don't licence their designs and when it comes to the shape of vehicles it becomes much more difficult to patent or trademark. It would have to be a blatant ripoff for Sh$t to hit the fan even when it's obvious to consumers (Ford Fusion's Aston Martin like grill). But when it comes to the underlying tech of a vehicle, there are lawsuits all the time especially between auto parts suppliers. I can name only one company who might sue over the shape of a phone for instance and win(and only in the USA). But even in tech things that are too broad or "standard" usually get their patents rejected. And Blackberries lawsuits would then inevitably be thrown out. This will be for the courts to decide and In my opinion the biggest winners will always be the lawyers...

18. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

It’s amazing how people assume that the IP in question is standard. Some people just don’t comprehend what they read. Anyone with a dash of intelligence can see that, according to what’s listed, its specific IP belonging to BlackBerry that SnapChat is using. I’m glad that you actually make sense and understand this Subie, as opposed to having such a venomous attitude about everything with the name BlackBerry on it. Unlike some uninformed and intelligence deprived individuals here, you understand that companies need to pay for what they use if they are using what someone else innovated and patented. They simply can’t fathom that BlackBerry is only doing what they should, especially since said violating company refused to stop using the IP when they were informed of it. No one cares who doesn’t care about what, as said person that is saying that will say anything negative about BlackBerry on just about every BlackBerry article. They’ve been doing it for years now. They simply don’t understand the importance of the IoT and security, or pretty much anything else for that matter.

20. Subie

Posts: 2344; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

Yup, and other tech companies should be glad that Blackberry is at least willing to license their patented IP (hopefully at a reasonable price) and not just issuing cease and desist orders...

21. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

Exactly. In every instance, BlackBerry has offered to sit down and discuss reasonable compensation BEFORE going to court. That’s the difference between them and Oracle and the other fruit based company.

23. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

But that's the thing though, this is something that can be applied to nearly anything electronic that has some form of communication. This is blackberry trying to get a piece of the pie that they can no longer make themselves. The pie some people still believe is still going strong despite the fact that they are misinformed as usual. I mean, they should just understand what they are saying before they say it.

26. meanestgenius

Posts: 21742; Member since: May 28, 2014

If this can be applied to other forms of communication, it just goes to show the strength and breadth of BlackBerry’s IP. iP which must be paid for in order to be used, and is actually paid for by some. Both Motorola and Palm, for example, pay to use BlackBerry’s IP. Snap should be immune from this? I don’t think so. This has nothing to do with what BlackBerry can and can’t take themselves concerning a piece of the pie, and everything to do with them protecting what is theirs. And despite your usual fountain of misinformation, BlackBerry’s messaging service is still going strong in Indonesia. So strong, that it’s the number one messaging service in that country. People need to understand what they are talking about before making a comment about it.

32. Venom

Posts: 3383; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

More like BlackBerry feeling threatened just because their own messaging platform isn't doing as well despite your cop-out example. Indonesia is a third world country, hardly enough to even be a comparable example. Stop grasping at straws.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.