Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Plugin Patent to Mean Changes in IE?

Posted by michael on from the speakeasy-has-spent-two-weeks-without-placing-my-order dept.

hexene writes "The W3C have issued an initial statement on the recent court case of Eolas v. Microsoft in regards to US Patent 5,838,906. The patent relates to the embedding of objects in hypermedia documents, and Microsoft has indicated they will have to make changes to Internet Explorer as a result of the ruling. There may also be far-reaching effects to both other web browser vendors and page authors. Check out the public mailing list to discuss the various issues." See the previous Eolas story for background.

4 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. Patents by Goo.cc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even though this was a loss for Microsoft, I am not happy about that ruling. In my opinion, this shows the harm that patents are doing to the computer industry. I also believe that patents last too long.

    1. Re:Patents by blowdart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well there would be one advantage, no more plugins means no more flash.

      *contented sigh* No more navigation bars, adverts with sound, splash screens

      (Note the W3C meeting was hosted by Macromedia, who probably have more to lose than anyone else)

  2. "plug-ins" = ...specifically what? by Empiric · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the W3C statement:

    The implementation can be local or distributed across a network, and is automatically invoked based upon type information in the document or associated with the object's data.

    It seems on initial glance that if this patent holds up, it could be argued to apply to the entire model of MIME types by which browsers invoke different behavior based on type.

    It also seems to directly apply to the notion of having Word launch when clicking on a ".doc" file.

    Couldn't one consider a browser and a word processor to both be "plug-ins" to the operating system? What specifically differentiates a "plug-in" from any other type of application functionality?

    Surely there is massive prior art on this going back at least to the early 80's. This patent is obscene.

    --
    ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
  3. Re:Actually, companies like IBM and Microsoft... by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hey sign cross licensing agreements with each other stating that they won't sue

    This is not what a cross licensing agreement says.

    The typical big company cross licensing arrangement goes like this. Okay, we've settled our dispute. Let's not bring patents into the war. (Like nuclear weapons.) So we will cross license eash other with each other's patents. I now have rights to all of your patents, and you have rights to all of my patents. This forecloses the possibility that you will ever sue me over any of your patents. But you still might sue me because I give you defective copies of Windows because I don't like the way you cozy up to Linux.

    --
    The price of freedom is eternal litigation.