Slashdot Mirror
Eolas vs. Microsoft Verdict Stands, Despite ReExam
theodp writes "A federal judge on Wednesday upheld a jury's $521 million verdict against Microsoft in the high-profile Web browser patent infringement lawsuit, denying Microsoft's motion to suspend a decision until the USPTO completes a reexamination of the patent. Eolas was also awarded prejudgment interest of $45 million. An injunction against future sales of IE that contain technology based on Eolas' patent was also granted, but put on hold pending an appeal."
An injunction against future sales of IE that contain technology based on Eolas' patent was also granted, but put on hold pending an appeal.
Does this mean that distribution of IE (with ActiveX enabled) may be made illegal? Doesn't Windows Update, Flash, Java , Director, etc. need ActiveX to work?
If this is the case, what if this patent-holding company decides to do the same to Mozilla, Konqueror, etc.? Are we screwed?
Craig
This is almost ideal news for the typical Slashdotter.
First, the existing patent system is widely complained about. This patent probably shouldn't have been granted in the first place. However, if Microsoft had won this case, all that would have happened is that this particular patent would have been invalidated. Now, a major tech company just took a half million dollar loss because the PTO is using silly rules. The tech industry now has serious reasons to argue for modification of tech patents. Microsoft's patent portfolio is doubtlessly valuable in terms of preventing newcomers from entering the market, but there's a significant question as to whether it's worth half a billion dollars (plus all the other copycats that are likely to run out and start suing large companies).
Second, someone had to take a nasty hit to get business folks upset about the state of things. And who would we rather have take the financial hit than Microsoft?
Best patent news I've heard in a long time.
I hope Eolas leaves Mozilla alone (well, AOL).
May we never see th