Slashdot Mirror


Supreme Court Sides With Microsoft Over AT&T

The Supreme Court today sided with Microsoft in another important patent case filed by AT&T. The case centered around whether selling Windows overseas infringed on AT&T's patents that are in Windows. Microsoft argued [PDF] that the copies being sold in Asia were "...not technically supplied from the United States because overseas manufacturers of its computers made copies of the software from a master disk and installed those copies into the operating system. Microsoft said it could not be considered a supplier since the copies, not the original software, were in the computers built abroad." Now, while I support the weakening of software patents in general, by this logic, would that mean that MS's patents don't apply to those that use pirated copies of Windows?

3 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. Piracy has nothing to do with patents by CodeShark · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What it simply means is that the Supreme Court is being consistent with existing law regarding patents, i.e. the method that M$ uses to export Windows to foreign companies means that certain types of patents don't apply therefore MS can't be sued for using patented code oversees if it obeys certain export rules.


    But this has nothing to do with "pirated copies", because software piracy is a matter of copyright law, not patent law, and there are numerous treaties governing the protection of copyrights internationally that still apply.

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
  2. Re:WTF? by Spazmania · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IANAL, but I suspect the ruling has been misrepresented.

    Generally, a company operating abroad is responsible for complying with local law, not US law. You can't sue a company in a US court for its behavior overseas. That's the the general rule; there are exceptions.

    The law makes an exception for building devices in the US which would infringe a patent if sold in the US but are instead exported -- the patent holder can sue in the US where the device is made. Microsoft argued that the general principle (local law) applies here, not the exception, because the would-be infringing device was actually manufacturered abroad.

    The Supreme Court agreed and applied the general rule: if AT&T wants to collect, they'll have to sue in the countries where the infringement occurred.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  3. Re:Does this mean..... by jfengel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think so. There are a couple of things going on here:

    1. This only applies to other countries.

    2. It only applies to the AT&T patents inside the software.

    It seems that the OEMs are nominally responsible for securing AT&T's patents in those countries before distributing the software. So if you're in Asia pirating copies of Windows, both Microsoft and AT&T will be suing you.

    If you're in the US, only Microsoft will sue you, and part of the money they take out of your hide should go to AT&T.

    So AT&T should, theoretically, be going after these OEMs; Microsoft isn't on the hook to pay them. But it's a lot easier for AT&T to pursue Microsoft than a bunch of Microsoft's OEMs. /IANAL