Microsoft Receives XML Patent

gsfprez writes "Well, i'm no patent lawyer, but if I'm reading this right, it seems that the basics of XML are being patented by Microsoft. If not the files themselves - at least what most of us would do with XML files. From the abstract: 'Systems, methods and data structures for encompassing scripts written in one or more scripting languages in a single file.' That smacks of what my config files do on my G5 for my G5, if you read it with a biased eye." We noted this was happening earlier, and now it's finally come to pass. While the patent does sound a bit dubious, a Microsoft spokesman was quick to deny that they'd be so bold as to patent XML itself.

Comments

not a patent of XML

[Pr0xY]

this seems more like a patent for embedding a script within XML, which is IMHO fair enough. Read the patent carefully, it is describing using XML in a specific way, not XML itself..

the text of the /. headline is a bit misleading.

proxy

Re:Prior Art..?

[cujo_1111]

If you read the patent text, you will find it is not a patent on XML itself. It is a patent on the method of encompassing multiple scripts inside an XML file. The scripts can be all written in the same language or different languages.

I think this may be used to change the way ASP works. It will allow you to use C# and javascript in one file and depending on the system configuration, it selects the correct script to run.

Re:Microsoft to Patent 1s, 0s

[rsborg]

In what CEO Bill Gates called "an unfortunate but necessary step to protect our intellectual property from theft and exploitation by competitors," the Microsoft Corporation patented the numbers one and zero Monday.

Give credit where credit is due, coward!

Prior Art?

[robbyjo]

this seems more like a patent for embedding a script within XML, which is IMHO fair enough.

Can we say Ant anyone? In a way, Ant is also a script, albeit it's geared towards installation. Or did I miss something?

From The Onion

[Osty]

Please properly credit your source. That article is from The Onion, circa 1998. The site you reference says it got the article from www.cars.com, which may be true, but it doesn't say exactly where on cars.com so the link could be followed to eventually find the real author.

... Like Javascript?

[peatbakke]

If I'm reading this correctly, the patent isn't about XML itself, but rather using XML as a container for various types of high level scripts.

From the summary of the patent:

The present invention incorporates the scripts of a computer system into a single file using Extensible Markup Language (XML) or another suitable format.

I'm seeing a conflict of interest with client-side web scripting, particularly Javascript and VBScript. Strangely enough, later on they even reference Javascript:

Within the <file> element, the "extension" attribute is used to indicate the language in which the script was written. For example, if the script was written in JavaScript, then the extension attribute in the file element would read "<file extension="js">".

Looks suspiciously like <script language="Javascript"> to me.

On the other hand, there's a lot of talk about "CDATA" in the patent. From what I grok, the patent is specific about using CDATA elements to encapsulate scripting languages. The listed example makes sure to encapsulate all the executable code within <!CDATA> tags .. can anyone clarify whether or not this means that a document must use the CDATA convention in order to be covered by this patent?

Re:You mean Db

[kfg]

You are incorrect. E# exists, as does B#, and any singer or violinist can produce them.

You are violating the intellectual property of J.S.Bach. His lawyers shall contact you anon.

How is your temper?

KFG

What it really is.

[Jason Pollock]

It's an extension of WinFS (or I assume that's what it's for?). Basically, it's a way to associate meta data with a script without having filesystem support for it.

So, you want to run a script, you do tabbed completion, it gives you a list of scripts and a description of each one. You select it and it is pulled out of the XML repository and run.

Useful? I would think that metadata in the FS would be a better way to go about it, but I would love an easy way to browse the scripts on my system. New? I've never seen it before. Obvious? Probably?

On a local system, this is like being able to use winzip to execute scripts inside of the .zip file, complete with descriptions.

Patenting XML? Nope, not even close.

The example should make it pretty obvious... Can't include it here, cause slashdot removes the tags. :)

Jason Pollock

Re:Quick...

[eggnet]

You have to admit that the idea to control lowercase and uppercase with a single bit has it's advantages. In one operation you can test both 'a' and 'A'. ASCII makes you use test on both and use addition and subtraction instead of the more computer friendly bit flips.

What makes you think that isn't true for ASCII? In ASCII a-z and A-Z are continuous and in-order with "A" starting at 65 and "a" at 97. That's a separation of 32, which makes them differ by a single bit.

Patent renewals in the United States

[tepples]

I think that a patent can be "renewed" once

"Renewal" on patents is different from "renewal" on pre-1978 copyrights. In the United States, patents last 3.5 years after they are granted; patents whose owners pay periodic maintenance fees are renewed to 7.5 years after grant, then 11.5 years after grant, then a maximum of 20 years after filing. Foreign patents may last up to a year longer because a U.S. inventor has one year to file for a foreign patent after having filed in the United States, and other countries' 20-year terms are counted from that.

Re:A Quick Cluestick for the Clueless.

[SWPadnos]

Actually, that's only partially true.

Usually, claims are made like so:
1) A device to clean shit.
2) A device of claim 1, which further Disinfects;
3) A device of claim 1, which further Deodorizes;
4) A device of claim 1, which both Disinfects and Deodorizes;
5) A device of claim 4, which further Polishes to a high gloss
6) A device to clean piss.
7) A device of claim 6, which further cleans vomit. ...
(usually limited to 20 or so claims)

So, if you make a shit cleaner, you infringe under claim 1.

If you make a disinfecting shit cleaner, you infringe under claim 2 - claim 1 wouldn't cover it alone, since it's an improvement to claim 1.

etc.

IANAL, but I have helped to write a patent application (which was accepted). I also have had the distinct displeasure of reading patents to try to find infringement.

Re:A Quick Cluestick for the Clueless.

[the eric conspiracy]

Every one of the claims must be implemented for a system to be covered by the patent.

Well, no. Claims may be independent, or they may be dependent. Implementation of a single independent claim is enough. Dependent claims include other claims by reference, and are more narrow in scope. The purpose of dependent claims is to give (more narrow) coverage in the broader independent claim is found to be unsustainable by the examiner or in court.

If a competitor constructs a system that implements all but one of the claims, it is not an infringement.


In this patent implementation of any of 1, 9, 19 OR 22 would be enough to trigger infringement.

Additonal claims do NOT narrow a patent's coverage. What does narrow coverage is the inclusion of various requirements in the claims themselves.

The list of claims and supporting information defines the coverage of the patent precisely.

Ever hear of the 'doctrine of equivalents'???

Re:Microsoft has never used a patent offensively

[mr_infiniti]

XML, which is a subset of SGML, was conceived about 1996 and became a W3C standard on Feb. 10, 1998. No one owns the exclusive rights to XML. It is licence-free and platform independant (doesn't sound like M$, does it?) For reasons too off-topic to get into here, suffice to say, there are different schema dialects of XML. The W3C XML Schema Working Group received a dialect submission from M$ in January, 1998, even before XML 1.0 was complete: XML-Data schema language and XDR (the XML Data-Reduced Schema), a subset of the W3C's final recommendation. Needless to say, M$ (and some others) products offer full support for XDR. There are other dialects and schemas of XML as well, such as the well known DTD, XSD, XPath, XLink, XPointer, XSL, SAX, XSLT, etc. and surely others I will offend someone by failing to mention. So to answer your question, M$ cannot patent XML - no way - but they certainly do have prior art to XML-data and XDR. This isn't a big deal because there is no neccessity in using these schema; XML is a great, open-ended language with lots of alternatives - heck, invent your own! Some references: http://www.w3.org/XML/ http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-XML-data-0105/

Re:why

[TomV]

It looks at first sight like it's about WSF files (Windows Script Files, for the Windows Script Host). Early versions of WSH didn't use XML, just raw script in a text file (.vbs, .js), but from WSH2, WSF files look like the following example from the MSDN Library:

[quote]
Since one scripting language may not have all the functionality you need, Windows Script Host allows you to combine multiple languages in a single .wsf file. The following example shows a .wsf file that includes both VBScript and PerlScript code:

<job id="PERLandVBS">
<script language="PerlScript">
sub PerlHello {
my $str = @_[0];
$WScript->Echo($str);
}
</script>

<script language="VBScript">
WScript.Echo "Hello from VBScript"
PerlHello "Hello from PERLScript"
</script>
</job>
[/quote]

Using XML to delimit script fragments in a variety of languages may or may not be particularly original; it seems to me that this is what the patent's about, rather than (shock, horror, page impressions, revenue) the whole of XML per se.

Prior Art Ubiquitously. Makes my living.

[duplicatedAccount]

There is no chance that this patent can stand. I make my tax euros exactly that way. I published first implementations of that mechanism around '93 (using SGML of course, there was no XML; LaTeX, Lout, roff and other scripts where mixed). I'm even doing this to implement distributed operating system. I'm using that to proof intrusion resistance, incorruptibility and non-deniability.

Some looser has wasted some $ for patent fees.