The high-profile litigation involving Research In Motion, which manufactures the popular BlackBerry line of wireless gadgets, and NTP, which claims RIM has infringed on some of its patents, offers an opportunity for the government to reflect on how it should properly position itself in commercial litigation between private parties.

NTP filed a patent infringement case against RIM in 2001, and a federal jury found in favor of NTP in 2002. The dispute has since been under appeal. The Supreme Court last week refused to hear RIM’s latest appeal, a decision that is only part of a larger legal battle. RIM also is challenging the NTP patents at the Patent Office. At least for the moment, many legal decisions are going against RIM, and a court-ordered injunction to shut down the BlackBerry service could happen. It is impossible at this point to know the ultimate outcome of the dispute.

RIM has been successful in garnering widespread support for its cause from its loyal following of BlackBerry users, who do not want to lose their BlackBerries. The high-technology community also is animated with discussions of the awkwardness of injunctions as a remedy for patent infringement disputes.

The most intriguing public relations front involves the federal government. In its court request for an injunction to shut down the RIM network, NTP apparently has sought to carve out government users for security and safety reasons. Thus, there is a possibility that the RIM network could shut down for everyone but the federal government. Ironically, the jury of ordinary citizens that found in favor of NTP might not be able to use BlackBerries, but the very judge and clerks in whose courtroom RIM and NTP do legal battle might be able to keep BlackBerry service.

The government attempts to encourage others to adhere closely to intellectual property law and it cracks down on those who flout it. These efforts seem hypocritical if the government holds that patent laws apply to everyone except itself. If RIM ultimately is found to have violated intellectual property law, the government should not profit from any form of wrongdoing.

The federal government should be extraordinarily cautious about the types of business relationships it maintains with companies when there are substantial doubts about the legitimacy of property and other legal rights. The government must maintain a detached and evenhanded relationship with all law-abiding businesses. It must be careful not to be influenced by one or the other disputing party, even those such as NTP, which is offering to continue wireless services only to the federal government.

Ultimately, RIM may yet be fully vindicated. But for more than two years, a federal court has held against RIM in an important matter involving intellectual property rights. Surely, one might expect some deference from other parts of the federal government to the initial – albeit not final – findings of a federal court. Rather than reviewing and perhaps diverting service contracts to other providers of wireless services, federal agencies appear more dependent than ever on RIM. With that dependence come the unseemly efforts to influence the federal government with offers of special treatment by either NTP or RIM.

The federal government cannot credibly refuse to do business with firms that have lost major commercial litigation battles, or else it would do business with no large firms. But the federal government can and should position itself with multiple vendors so that the legal predicaments of one major supplier do not influence either governmental judicial policy or governmental procurement policy.

Our government’s authority rests on moral credibility. We expect the government to administer justice fairly and blindly, applying laws equally to all parties. It should not tilt the scales of justice, embracing luxuries that are declared off-limits to everyone else. The proper message that the government can send NTP and RIM is a firm one: The federal government will not be the last user of the RIM network but the first one. Private parties can and may take their chances with RIM. But the federal government has more than just its wireless convenience at stake.

A former FCC commissioner, Mr. Furchtgott-Roth is president of Furchtgott-Roth Economic Enterprises. He can be reached at hfr@furchtgott-roth.com.