Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Found Guilty of Patent Infringement
Spy der Mann writes "Microsoft has been found guilty of patent infringement and ordered to pay a Guatamalan inventor Carlos Armando Amado almost $9m in damages.
The US District Court of Central California court ruled that Microsoft had infringed on his intellectual property and ordered it to pay him $8.96m.
The patent in question is a method to transfer data between Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Access using a single spreadsheet."
In other news, Guantemala's gross domestic product tripled today...
Sigur RÃs: I didn't know that Heaven had a rock band.
So wait, does this mean patents are good now?
I'm so confused!
Patent infringement is not a crime, so they were not, in fact, found "guilty".
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
As much as I hate Microsoft, I hate people who think they can use patents to cash in on something after the fact. Rambus did this in its ambush of memory makers. Eolas did this to Microsoft. Intertrust is doing this now to MS.
These companies sit around and brainstorm ideas without ever coming up with anything tangible, then they receive patents on their broad ideas. With the patent in hand, they can then sue anyone and anything that looks to be infringing. It's really sad.
At least when IBM or Microsoft or Sun patent something, they have some tangible product they look to implement. The patent leeches just look for traps they can set for big payoffs later on.
i like this idea you are trying to sell us. but it reminds me of something we are already working on. you may leave now, no need to take your folder with you.
Jackson found innocent, invites school bus full of children to his ranch to celebrate.
Yahoo decides to give up fight against Google and shifts all it's resources to making small toys for the quarter machines at grocery stores.
Gnome and KDE finally resolve differences and merge, new name to be KnomE
Secluded inventor in Guatamala buys entire country a round.
You will be baked, and there will be cake.
doesnt bill have that much in his couch ?
Can anyone tell me more about their good/bad experiences regarding IP and Microsoft ?
Dear rd4tech
I've had a good experience, and I definitely look forward to future business with them.
Sincerely
Carlos Armando Amado
I'm afraid of making any sort of software, even for fun. If it somehow leaves my PC goes public, someone could notice I made it, dig up some old patent, and sue my ass to Hoboken, New Jersey. This leeching is far worse than file leeching, and it's always sad to see that something intended to advance science and the arts (see Sec. 8, Clause 8) is impeding it instead. If it can happen to "M$" with their many IP/etc. lawyers, it can happen, and cause far worse damage, to us. That's -1, Scary to me.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Carlos Armando Amado devised a way to connect Excel with Access using a specially crafted spreadsheet during his tenure as a graduate student at Stanford University. After applying for a patent in 1990, Mr. Amando approached Microsoft to license the software, but was denied.
Microsoft then used the same exact method.
Now, while i totally disagree with the idea of patents like this... It changes the story a bit doesnt it?
Heh, after all this is slashdot.
Poetic justice?! Hardly!
The only good that could come of this would be the remote chance that it could convince MS that software patents are a terrible idea and prod them into backing Red Hat and Oracle's push to reform patents in the US and Europe.
Sorry, the giant tripped over a giant turtle and spilled some cash.
As much as I hate the company and its products, and believe me I do, this is a case that should've either been thrown out or used to nullify the patent. Instead the judgement strengthened the concept of software patents and non-novel patents, which in turn strengthens Microsoft's position as a monopoly, for a sum of money that's just barely half a single day's take.
It must be Windows. It needs half a gig of RAM and a hardware-accelerated graphics card just to run Solitaire.
No, we use U.S. Dollars, even for civl awards here in Ahnuldh's Cal-eee-fonya.
Unfortunately if you look you'll notice that as the number of frivolous patent lawsuits against Microsoft has gradually increased over the last few years, Microsoft's response has been... to suddenly start filing a whole bunch of patents. Lots of patents. Even more than before. And making a big deal in the press about patents and how important they are. And making a big deal to Europe about why they need software patents. Whereas before software patents was something they didn't really give much public indication of caring about one way or the other.
Microsoft obviously isn't doing this for protection, since the only people who've been suing Microsoft have been tiny parasite IP companies-- the kind of people who a patent shield is useless against. Instead it almost kind of seems to me like Microsoft is brushing off the patent judgments like an elephant swatting flies with its tail, but meanwhile going "wait... you mean patents can be used for evil? Interesting...", as if even though the lawsuits may sting a little they don't mind so much because it's given them some ideas of their own.
I hope to whatever Gods may or may not exist that this is just my overactive paranoid imagination.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Wrong.
The reason it's 'a good thing' is because the more small companies, in some cases companies who are little more then patent whores, can successfully sue the big companies who actually have a say in government policy the better chance we have of reforming the patent system. If this ruling leads to more and more ridiculous rulings costing MS and other big companies millions upon millions of companies, hopefully it will get to the point where the people in power will be hit hard enough in the pocket book to finally have the motivation to change software patents.
Yeh, the same double standard that says landmines are always bad, but that we can ignore temporarily if say, Pol Pot gets one accidentally stuffed up his ass.
Oh wait. That's not a double standard, that's just us cheering when bad things happen to bad people. Whooddah thunkit?
No. What will happen is that big companies that have influence over government policy will lobby to have the bar raised so high that small patent holders ("whores", as you say) will not be able to prove a case in the first place.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
So.. he patented a way for Microsoft Excel to work with Microsoft Access.. both products that Microsoft makes. Then he sued Microsoft??? I know.. i patent a way for Apple Intel to work with Apple PowerPC, no one would ever think of that.
You didn't get it:
1. The guy came up with a technique to interact with Access and Excel while doing graduate studies and gets a patent.
2. He approached Microsoft Corp. in the 90s and offered them his patent. Microsoft rejects the idea and say they're not interested.
3. About the same time, Microsoft adds the same technique to his products, makes a great deal of it and gets millions in revenue.
4. Then, and only then, the guy went to court, proved that he was the first to come up with the technique , proved that he approached Microsoft, proved that he showed it to them before they ever thought about it and then gets a fair amount of money.
I don't support software patents, but if Microsoft is promoting that nasty game, they have to obey the nasty game's rules.
Basically, it went like this:
Microsoft obtains software product A.
Microsoft obtains software product B.
Microsoft begins making them work together.
Guy beats Microsoft to market.
Microsoft continues making their products work together.
Guy sues Microsoft, wins millions for being first to patent obvious method made "novel" by the fact that it works on those confusin' new computers.
This would work against Linux.
This crap would work on anything.
Microsoft did *NOTHING* wrong here. They didn't steal his stuff or anything. They just made their own products work together. It probably wouldn't even have been an issue if Excel and Access had been marketed under the same freaking product name.
Ludicrous.
"that MS is firing a few thousand patents a year at the USPTO - protecting themselves."
EEEEH! Wrong! All that they have to do is demonstrate prior art if they're charged with patent infringement. If they can show such then they should be able to win just about any lawsuit alleging wrongdoing. The entire point of a patent is to claim exclusive original rights or exclusive use.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
All that they have to do is demonstrate prior art if they're charged with patent infringement
Sorry, but that's simply not the case, as I'm currently serving as an expert witness for a defendant in a patent case. It's not enough to have prior art, you must also convince a jury that you have prior art. Good luck getting a jury of everyday schmoes to understand some complex technical issue.
You see both sides will have expert witnesses, and they will both say how much they believe they are right. Both sides will spout technical jargon and the juries eyes will glaze over. And the jury will determine the winner based on things like who most likable. So if you can paint yourself as some poor schlub who got ripped off by MS, then the technical stuff really doesn't matter. Really. It's fucking sad, but that's how it works.
Arbitrary sig
3) Let someone else use your invention and keep quiet
RTFA, after he invented and applied for a patent, he approached MS with it. They declined to buy it. He was awarded the patent. He claims that MS used his patent. When he found out, he sued.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Hardly.
The highest rule is that we all have to live by the same rules.
There is nothing wrong with:
(1) Saying a certain rule is bad and should be changed
*and*
(2) Appreciating the JUSTICE of someone being forced to face the consequences of supporting a bad rule
I say Microsoft should not get hit with software patents - ON THE SOLE CONDITION THAT NO ONE GET HIT WITH SOFTWARE PATENTS.
Microsoft supports software patents and they have absolutely no right to complain or play the victim when the very rule they support comes and bites them in the ass.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Bzzzzzzt. They were not an integrated suite in 1990. They were separate products. What allowed them to be integrated into a suite? Maybe ideas like the one this guy patented and Microsoft infringed upon.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.