The big news last month was that Research in Motion (‘RIM’) finally reached a settlement with NTP Inc (‘NTP’) in relation to RIM’s production and marketing of the BlackBerry push-email device, which NTP alleged infringed its patent. Pundits were amazed by the terms of settlement, pursuant to which RIM agreed to pay NTP some US$612.5m. (This is a little less surprising when one remembers that NTP was threatening to seek an interlocutory injunction against RIM, which would have had the effect of shutting down the BlackBerry email service — not to mention plunging hundreds of firms into a communication stone age, and thousands of lawyers and executives into BlackBerry withdrawal.)

Many have criticised NTP’s suit as mala fides and its subsequent extraction of the settlement as ‘bordering on extortion’, especially since there are strong doubts about whether their patent is actually valid. Pegoraro, for example, has argued that the NTP patent should never have been granted, and that the damage claimed by the company is puzzling at best in light of the fact that it had made no effort whatsoever to commercialise the intellectual property it claimed gave rise to a remedy.

However, the real winners are not NTP or its shareholders (though they would also be laughing, I’m sure) but rather their lawyers. Wiley, Rein & Fielding, a mid-tier firm in Washington DC, took the case on a contingency basis, and now stands to take away one third of the $612.5m settlement in fees.

To put this in perspective, that’s substantially more than the firm normally earns during an entire year. Regardless, NTP still escaped with a pretty sizeable (if ethically questionable) return on their investment. Further, as Mobile Magazine notes, NTP and its shareholders will still get to keep the remainder of the $612.5m settlement even if the relevant patent is eventually rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Patently ridiculous or karmic hilarity?