The Psion of today doesn’t make consumer PDAs. Instead it focuses on industrial devices, such as the sort of ruggedized handhelds that your delivery driver might ask you to sign, or which a mobile repairman might use to track jobs and report back to base. Motorola Solutions – the non-consumer half of Motorola, after it was split up in 2011 – plans to merge the Psion expertise with its own enterprise division.

What’s not quite clear is who controls the particularly special patents on some of the elements that made the Psion PDAs so great. Designed by Martin Riddiford – now of Therefore design consultants – and variously assigned to him and to Psion, the filings covered the hinged sliding/folding mechanism, the form-factor which prevented the PDA from toppling back even if touched near the top of the display, and the tactile keyboard used in the Series 5 and other designs.

It’s those designs that I’d most like to see show up on the market again, and I can’t help but wish that it was Motorola Mobility – itself in the process of being gobbled up by Google – that had showed an interest in Psion, not its enterprise-obsessed cousin. They may be old – the hinge patent was granted back in the late-90s – but there’s nothing on the market which has quite the same imaginative use of space.

In one particularly cruel moment, I was even shown images of a prototype third-party design that borrowed the hinge and keyboard mechanism but which ran Android on a modern processor, though was unable to share them. It’s not clear if this was the same project as the PsiXpda Android MID we reported on back in June 2011, but either way the trail has gone cold.

Given Google’s interest in pushing both Chrome OS and Android, and Motorola Mobility’s experiments with the Lapdock form-factor, all of that coalescing with the Psion keyboard and form-factor could’ve made for a very tempting device that stood out from the rest of the tablet/phone ecosystem. It seems, though, that such a product is unlikely to be found in the next chapter of the Psion story.

“Psion is a compelling opportunity to strengthen our industry-leading, mobile-computing portfolio” Greg Brown, chairman and CEO of Motorola Solutions said in a statement today, ”with ruggedized handheld products and vehicle-mount terminals that will deepen our presence in the global markets in which we compete.”

As for Psion, the deal is being painted as an opportunity to minimize the potential impact of an changeable marketplace. “The offer by Motorola Solutions provides Psion’s shareholders with certainty in an environment where certainty is in short supply” company chairman John Hawkins said today. The deal – which will be fulfilled in cash – is expected to complete in Q4 2012.

Psion is perhaps most widely known for the Series 3 and Series 5, ranges of clamshell personal digital assistants sold in the early 1990s. The Series 5 in particular was vaunted for its excellent keyboard – arguably still unmatched today – which used an innovative hinge assembly to fold a decent-sized QWERTY ‘board with surprising degrees of key-travel into a compact footprint.

However, warm fuzzy feelings around the Series 5 were overshadowed back in 2009, when Psion attempted to cash in on the netbook fad by digging out its trademark on the term. The case was eventually settled with Intel for an undisclosed amount, but not before Psion had issued cease & desist orders to netbook fan-sites and manufacturers.

The original PsiXpda UMPC – which we reviewed in January 2010 – was a rebadged DigiCube MIDPhone-50, running Windows XP on a sliding, tilting 4.8-inch 800 x 480 resistive touchscreen display, with a full QWERTY keyboard, Atom Z510 1.1GHz processor and 1GB of RAM. At the time we criticized its underwhelming battery life and disappointingly small display (which struggled even to accommodate Windows XP’s default messages) and suggested that it was not the model to break UMPCs out into the mainstream.

Pinnock apparently agrees, admitting that the original PsiXpda was “not fast enough and not good enough.” Instead, he’s looking to the much-loved Psion Series 5mx (shown above) design for a follow-up. The 5mx managed – by virtue of a clever sliding-folding hinge mechanism – to fit a large physical QWERTY keyboard with decent travel into a 170 x 90 x 23 mm form-factor, big enough for many to actually touch-type on. A useful byproduct of the design meant that tapping the 5.6-inch touchscreen wouldn’t topple the 5mx backward.

Rather than attempt to squeeze a desktop OS onto the new PsiXpda, Pinnock intends to use Android, which should add up to longer battery life and more consumer appeal. Although we’ve seen Android MIDs with physical ‘boards before, they’ve always been intended for thumb-typing rather than anything more ambitious. No word on when PsiXpda intends to release the new model, but we’re tentatively curious to see if its second attempt can do a better job of living up to the Psion inspiration.

As for E3, Microsoft and Sony battled it out to gain the motion-controller upper-hand, with the former debuting their fiendishly complex “Project Natal” system and the latter bringing a glowstick.  That’s a little unfair, actually, as hands-on reports coming out of E3 suggest that both systems work very well (and, key, seem more accurate than the Wii).  Sony also announced the much-rumored PSP Go!, a UMD-free all-digital version of the PSP-3000. 

Zipping over to Computex, and its unsurprisingly been a battle of the netbooks.  Psion and Intel finally lay down their swords and agreed that the term “netbook” can be used by one and all, only to find that ARM are attempting to coin the phrase “Smartbook” – to describe a cheaper, long-running alternative to the existing Atom-based netbooks – while Microsoft can’t quite decide what name to use but just want to make sure they can sell the priciest Windows 7 SKU for the hardware.

NVIDIA haven’t been resting on their laurels either, announcing multiple hardware partners who’ll be using their Ion and Tegra chipsets, while Qualcomm have been pushing Snapdragon hard.  It’s a complicated market, but the winner looks to be the consumer: they’ll be the ones spoilt for choice with high-def capable ultraportables at hitherto unseen prices.  There’s too much new tech to realistically cover in this short review, so check out our full show coverage with the Computex 2009 tag.

While we weren’t playing with the Pre, the SlashGear team have been tapping away on Sony Ericsson’s W995a, a megapixel-packed phone now available SIM-free in the US, together with enjoying some big-screen, small-budget entertainment from the BenQ Joybee GP1 pico-projector.  Don’t forget to join us tomorrow, Monday 8th June at 10am San Francisco time (1PM New York; 6PM London) at http://live.slashgear.com/ for all the news from Apple’s WWDC 2009 keynote.

Neither Intel nor Psion have accepted any level of liability in the case, which saw Psion accused of misrepresenting their hardware sales with regards what Intel perceived as a legacy device bearing the “Netbook Pro” name.  Meanwhile Psion counter-sued Intel for trademark infringement, seeking to obtain not only exclusive use of the term netbook but Intel’s netbook.com domain and financial damages.

Psion have agreed to not seek damages from any companies that have already used the netbook name, who are using it presently, or who may use it in future.  Now Intel just has to face up to the latest competition in the budget ultraportable space: Qualcomm’s Smartbook platform.

Intel also maintain that, at the time it adopted the term “netbook”, it was unaware that Psion claimed ownership of any relevant trademark.  It’s point of “formal adoption” came, Intel suggest, when it acquired the netbooks.com domain, building a site that it denies is to “promote computer chips for use in laptop computers”.

The response leaves Psion in pretty much the same position as before: proving that they can reasonably keep hold of a trademark for a product not on sale in the US for over five years, and no longer in production.  Right now, though, it looks like there’s little chance of Intel giving in and handing over the coveted domain.

Those damages are to be calculated according to the profit it claims Intel has made through misuse of the netbook trademark.  While sales figures may be able to dismiss claims that Psion abandoned the trademark, it seems less likely that either a jury or a court will buy the company’s assertion that “netbook” is synonymous with the Psion Netbook Pro.

In the gallery below: Psion’s current flyers for the Netbook Pro, which the company claims is still seeing significant sales among vertical markets.  Courtesy jkOnTheRun.

Full Psion response after the cut

According to Psion, while manufacturing of the Netbook Pro ended, sales did not, and they’re still shipping existing stock to clients in supply chain logistics, which they say is their most typical customer.  Production ceased, they claim, not from lack of demand but because a power management controller chip went out of production and a replacement couldn’t be found; it was that specialized controller that allowed the Netbook Pro to run for 8hrs straight or last 10 days in standby.

If Psion can evidence all this – and they say they have the confidential invoices to prove it – then it adds a whole new dimension to the legal case.  They still have to answer claims that “netbook” has become a generic term, but the simple fight Dell and Intel thought they might have doesn’t look to be panning out.  As for us consumers, meanwhile, we’d quite like an 8hr/10 day netbook please Psion; that would be a great way to show everyone exactly how much of a netbook player you are.

In 2006, Psion in fact had multi-million dollar sales of the Netbook ® Pro computer in both the US and the EU. The bulk of sales were (and continue to be) in the highly specialised supply chain logistics area – perhaps not the easiest thing for third parties to get visibility on, but nevertheless, real sales to real customers in the US. And those real sales to real customers in the US continue even to this day. Attached is a typical Netbook ® Pro sales flyer (not included here), so you can see that Psion really were (and are) branding this computer as a ‘Netbook’.

I can quite understand why people might have assumed that sales ceased a while back – it’s not as if the product has been in Best Buy. But those people simply had no access to Psion’s confidential sales information.

So the facts are that, although manufacture has been discontinued, sales in the US and EU have not. And its continuing sales that are important to preventing a trademark from becoming abandoned. We’ll of course be setting the record straight in our court filings.

Incidentally, manufacture of the Netbook ® Pro had to cease prematurely not because of any lack of demand. It was because supplies of a replacement for a specialised chip controller could not be found – the Netbook ® Pro had very sophisticated power management, given it 8 hours of runtime and 10 days in standby, as well as instant-on (still an amazing feature in a laptop). Because of the sophisticated nature of the Netbook ® Pro design, a simple replacement controller could not be found and that meant that manufacture had to cease once those supplies of controllers were exhausted; it was a great pity.

I hope this clarifies the situation; Psion continues to sell the Netbook ® Pro computer. It’s got all the invoices to prove multi-million dollar sales in the US in 2006, and sales that continue even to this day. There’s been no abandonment of the trademark.

Just because we’re not selling tens of thousands through Best Buy doesn’t mean we’re not entitled to our trademark.

According to Dell, there are three good reasons why Psion’s trademark should be declared null.  Firstly, and of most interest to us consumers, they’re saying that Psion abandoned the trademark as they have no products based upon it.  Secondly, Dell are accusing Psion of fraud in their initial registration, over Psion’s claim in 2006 that they have used the “netbook” trademark for five consecutive years.

Finally, Dell believe that the term “netbook” has now become generic, and is no longer associated with anything specific from Psion’s stable.  We’re yet to her Psion’s rebuttal.

[via jkOnTheRun]

Full legal correspondence after the cut

While that includes manufacturers who use the term “netbook” in their promotional material, Origin and Psion are also using it as justification to target blogs and fan-sites that feature adverts that refer to the budget ultraportables as netbooks.  When challenged with the fact that often these adverts are contextually (and automatically) placed by Google AdWords or other systems, and not subject to control by the site admins, Origin has suggested that it would rather work with the retailer featured than the site.

Unsurprisingly opinions are still mixed regarding the ongoing situation, with some seeing it as Psion’s legal right to defend their trademark while others question why it has taken so long into the current netbook lifespan for them to act.  Interestingly, Origin report that all of the initial sites contacted with cease & desist letters have since responded and agreed to work to delete the offending trademark.

Statement One:

I just wanted to address a mistaken assumption made by some of your readers (including journalists in more countries than I now care to count).

When you said in your 23 December blog that I’d written to ‘some netbook enthusiast sites’ asking them to cease and desist using the ‘Netbook’ registered trade mark, many readers assumed that these letters had gone to people simply commenting on the tech scene.  One of your early posters, called Andy, even said:  “Why go after a bunch of bloggers? It’s not like they’re profiteering off the name.”

Andy makes a fair point.

Here are the facts.

We have sent letters out solely to those making a direct, financial profit from use of the ‘Netbook’ trademark.

95% of all letters have been sent to retailers and manufacturers using the ‘Netbook’ trademark (including the very largest players in this space.  You’ll no doubt be aware that few portable manufacturers in fact use the ‘Netbook’ term at all.  For example, Asus, a pioneer in this space, does not to any appreciable extent – it’s an Eee PC.  Not an Eee PC ‘Netbook’.  But it’s a different picture in retail and our over-riding priority is to persuade the retail community to adopt a different term.)

5% have been sent to websites that have sponsored advertising or other for-profit links that include the prominent use of the ‘Netbook’ trademark and a link to a retailer or manufacturer using the ‘Netbook’ trademark.

0% have been sent to straight blogs, tech enthusiasts sites or review sites – i.e. with no prominent ‘Netbook’ related sponsored advertising or other ‘Netbook’ related for-profit links.

Attached is a screen grab (pictured right) from the www.small-laptops.com site, whose letter you used.  As you can see, it falls in that 5% category.  (He can of course easily remove the ‘Netbook’ related sponsored advertising or other ‘Netbook’ related for-profit links, if he wishes to).

When we started this project for Psion, we drew a firm distinction between entities profiteering off the ‘Netbook’ name, and those not doing so.  Neither we, nor Psion, thought that it would be fair, proportionate or sensible to start this process off by writing to those not profiteering financially and we have not done so.  Journalists and bloggers obviously have to use some term to refer to the new class of ultra-low cost portables – we’d rather they didn’t use ‘netbook’ now that they’re aware of Psion’s registered trade marks, and we hope that they too will transition to whatever term becomes the legitimate generic.  But are we about to start a wave of lawsuits against journalists and bloggers? The answer is an emphatic ‘no’. Our priorities lie elsewhere and always have done.

I’ll obviously need to send clarificatory emails out to those journalists who got the wrong end of the stick, but if you wanted to post something yourself first, please let me know and I’ll hold off a day or so.  (Not exactly a scoop, but just a professional courtesy.) I have, for example, just received a mail from Der Spiegel in Germany asking for urgent clarification, after reading a posting in the UK’s Guardian. I do need to give them both all the facts asap.

There is of course a legitimate and important question centered on the extent to which corporations can influence or control the language we ordinarily use.  If your readers are really interested in the words they use, then perhaps they might give some careful thought to why they started using the term ‘netbook’ in a generic way in the first place. If you’re aware of substantial ‘generic’ use that pre-dates Intel’s 2008 marketing efforts to promote its Atom processor, I’d be interested to learn of it.

Incidentally, we have started to receive direct responses from recipients of our letters.  So far, all have agreed to use a different term. I think that’s because, when you really look carefully at the merits of the situation, both legal and ethical, Psion has a fair point.

Most retailers and manufacturers in my experience respect others’ registered trademarks – after all, they are frequently their own most valuable assets.  But there’s obviously quite a mountain to climb here.

Anyway, best wishes for the Christmas season.  If you have any follow-up questions at all, feel free to let me know.

Statement Two:

Thanks for posting my response.

Just a couple of further points of clarification.

First, Psion has been using the ‘Netbook’ trademark continuously since 1999 – perhaps in recent years the extent of use has not been that great, but Psion is still actively supplying ‘Netbook’ accessories and also providing maintenance and support to existing ‘Netbook’ users.  Registered trademarks aren’t just for protecting multi-billion dollar brands.

Secondly, where a blogger uses context sensitive advertising that is completely outside of its control (so it has no knowledge at all whether a ‘Netbook’ related advert will be placed in its blog site), then we’re taking the view that we need to focus on working on persuading the featured retailer to adopt a term other than ‘netbook’.  So if any recipient of one of our letters is in that position, if they want to let me know, that would be helpful all round.  Although we can’t accept that use of ‘netbook’ in a generic fashion is legitimate, our priorities lie elsewhere.

While the Psion Netbook (or the Netbook Pro) itself is no longer in production, the company that own the trademark still manufacture accessories for the device.  We’re still yet to see the content of the letter apparently sent out; a preliminary search for UK trademarks shows that Psion Teklogic hold “netpad” and “nettablet”, but the contested “netbook” and “netbook pro” marks have not yet been found.

In any case, the company seems late to the game in attempting to wrench back the terms, never-mind the fact that they’re really targeting the wrong people.  It’s Intel that coined the current use of the netbook phrase – and who own and run the Netbook.com portal.