MountainHawk
Registered User
That doesn't make it any else accounting fraud. It was blatant fraud, backdating options for himself and the other executives so they knew they would be 'in the money at issue', but not have to report them as 'in the money at issue' options.I glad to see that we can slander other's on HFboards, but if we say anything even remotely critical about another poster, out comes the hammer.
The RIM patent dispute was insanity (and the patent office is still in the process of rejecting the trivial patents). The "accounting fraud" was solely related to employee stock options, which was a common move by lots of tech companies at the time. It is also fully resolved as well.
And if the patent calim was that bad, I doubt they pay $600M to settle the claims after a jury found them guilty of patent infringement.