Over the weekend, I had to remove the battery from my BlackBerry. A label inside the case includes the statement: "Patents: http://www.rim.net/patents." This is the only patent-related marking I could find on the device.
Before the BlackBerry, I have never noticed a product marking that consisted solely of a reference to a website. Its an interesting idea, and, I think, an elegant solution to a problem that has troubled patentees for years — keeping a product marked with an updated list of relevant patents. New labels, new molding forms, etc. Always a challenge.
The website idea is very interesting. The format is easily updated and gives the public a readily available listing of patents (I’m disregarding the fact that the BlackBerry patent website hasn’t been updated since May 8, 2003). It seems like a great solution. But, is it a legally sufficient marking?
If yes, I see at least two major advantages for the patentee/manufacturer:
- It eliminates the problem of keeping product labeling and/or product tooling up to date. I can imagine that, for certain types of products, this could save large amounts of money.
- By reviewing readily-available website statistics and logging details, the patentee/manufacturer could monitor the visitors, possibly gaining information about those who have notice of the patents.
I’d appreciate e-mail from anyone who has examples of other similar patent markings and/or case citations specifically relating to the issue. I wonder if it has been addressed in the ongoing Blackberry litigation.
