Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Word Patent Case Going To Supreme Court
jfruhlinger writes "Microsoft may have had to change Word after being found guilty of violating a Canadian company's patents, but it's still resisting paying for damages — and is taking the fight to the US Supreme Court. If you can't stand either MS or patents, who do you root for here?"
microspork is teh suckxorx! lolololo see how 1337 i am biteches
I hope they lose BIG. This might encourage them to think that other patents they violated (being evil, see!) will also be punished with huge fines, which means the logical thing for MS to do is to start opposing software patents altogether.
If you can't stand either MS or patents, who do you root for here?"
The only side certain to win this.
You can hope the patent and patents like it get invalidated, by the way. The patent can get invalidated with Microsoft still being liable.
There are outcomes that satisfy anyone, unless you hate lawyers and multi-million dollar settlements with big corporations too, in which case, you are boned.
You root for Microsoft, of course. If you don't like Microsoft, you can choose not to use their software. But everyone is affected by the ridiculous state of the patent system right now. I'm not optimistic that the Supreme Court can/will restore any sanity, but it's a much bigger problem than any one company.
Hi... I'm Larry... the shivering chipmunk... brrrrr!... I'm cold... I need a sweater...
I'm rooting for the Word of God.
recreational, universal composition of living thoughts, non-profit until the jews tempted Eve with a PowerPC while Adam was at Burger King in favor of a WOPR rather than a Big Mac...
And it's all in the public domain thank to the Covenanters over in Scotland.
Beat that, Copyright'fags.
So Canadian Court says pay money, so you go above them to the US Supreme Court, aka, Court of the World?
Sig: I stole this sig.
Apple is the most user-friendly, tech-loving, patent-hating company out there. I support Apple!
is tired, circa 2002
it's 2010 folks, google is the evil beast you want to take down. yes, i know some of you still look at google like the darling it was... in 2002
some of you really need to update your kneejerk prejudices for the new decade, thanks
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Just be satisfied that each has to deal with the other.
"Which position do your biased emotions tell you to take?"
Hope that MS loses to a multi-billion dollar lose (say even 100 billion), and that afterwards, either SCOTUS or CONgress will kill forever the evil method patents.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Whatever ever happened to jurisdictional Boundaries? Patents and Copyright don't extend to implementations done outside of one's geography.
If the case of one foreigner prosecuting another foreigner, then I am in favor of Microsoft personel retaliating against this shit. Judiciary is obviously the problem in their not getting enough work, so they try trolling eachother into these international court disputes that never were from the beginning.
It's looking more like dollar-signs before bullets, just as planned by the Jews. Countries are supposed to exist in a proprietary nature, endemic only to the people joined to them, regardless of what anyone says elsewhere.
Who knows. Maybe they will simply say, "hey we already ruled patents had to be tied to a specific machine, not a generic one like that used here", and rule the patent invalid, and thus set the precedent that all software patents on generic systems are invalid. But I guess that would be logical, and we can't use logic when talking about the US and Patents and Court.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I think patents are just fine, in fact beneficial (although admittedly not to those who want everything for free), and while I have no particular love for Microsoft, I never really understood the hatred either. I guess I'll have to wait for the case to be judged.
It is time to sue the patent office, not the patent holders:
The question the Supreme Court must answer is "What burden of proof is required to invalidate a patent?" The difficulty is that the *legal* answer may not match the *real world* answer. In theory, it should require a high burden of proof because the patent office already examined the patent application, determined it was patentable, searched for prior art, etc. But in reality, the patent office isn't doing that. I wish I could find the public statement where they basically said it isn't their responsibility to search for prior art. This problem is amplified by the fact that recent administrations are relying on the patent office to become a revenue generator.
In my opinion, Microsoft should sue the patent office. If the Supreme Court operates under the assumption that the patent office is following a certain procedure, and they are not, then they should have a case against the patent office. Then, they can go back to the courts and invalidate the patent after they have proven that the patent office is not doing their job.
I'm sure it has been said in other comments by now, but just in case. Let us not forget that the Canadian company in question actually DID have a product related to the patent. They DID work with Microsoft. Microsoft stopped dealing with them and then continued to use the patented technology knowingly without license. THIS is why the court of appeals UPHELD the court findings. MS still doesn't want to pay, so they are taking all the legal approaches available to them to avoid paying. The Canadian company (IMI) in this particular case is NOT a patent troll. In fact they are actually using the patent system the way it was intended - to stop the big boys from destroying the business of the little players. So, you'll excuse me if I root for IMI in this case. MS is not innocent here - the courts even said so. BUT, perhaps if MS is made to play by the same rules they want competitors to play by, perhaps they'll realize the current system is borked and increase their efforts to help change the system. We'll ignore for now MS's role in creating the current cluster-f#$@ system that is in place. Disclaimer - I'm a Canadian. But I don't care where the company came from. MS bullied the company pretty much out of business by stealing their tech, and now doesn't want to pay the piper for their actions. I don't have any respect for anybody that plays that way.
I'm an Aussie, ya dipstick! I root sheilas....
Opponents of software patents should root for Microsoft here, regardless of how you feel about the company (I loathe their philosophy but like a few of their products).
Believing in justice means believing it applies even to your enemies and opponents. Besides, we don't want the Supreme Court setting some awful pro-software-patent precedent that will haunt less-deep-pocketed open-source developers down the road.
My bicyles
Is it a suit over Clippy? Because that would be hiliarous if that little jerk got his revenge on MS on this scale lol.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
we lose
Pretty much everyone around here loves to bash Microsoft but we will have to have a Microsoft party where we all do a Windows theme for a week on our Linux and Mac boxes if Microsoft does some serious damage to the patenting of software.
Seriously, if MS trashes this whole deranged patent situation they will win the true title of "Do no evil masters of 2011". If you were to compare it to other things on our tech head collective wish lists this would rank at the top with Oracle fully opening up Java, or Network Neutrality. The reality is that not many other companies have the resources to see this through to the end. Even Google tends to roll over in the face of these lawsuits. RIM caved in on one, paying out hundreds of millions, just before the patent was tossed. It seems that MS has realized that Patent Trolls are only going to grow into a bigger problem that cuts into smaller margins.
Yes MS will probably burn some of this Karma by being obnoxious but this is a major deposit in the Karma bank to my thinking.
Thank you Microsoft!
If you can't stand either MS or patents, who do you root for here?
Whatever, that's easy. The supreme court knocks down all patent law, finding it unconstitutional, while simultaneously fining Microsoft a million billion dollars for contempt of court or something. Is this really that hard for you? The solution is so easy. You're welcome.
Qxe4
Obligatory http://xkcd.com/827/ (yes, it's today's!)
Although I would agree that Microsoft has acted in a dishonest and unethical fashion, I'm not sure that redress should be found in the patent court. Can't they sue Microsoft on other grounds, such as breach of trust or violation of their NDA?
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
"If you can't stand either MS or patents, who do you root for here?"
Between two evils you should choose to support neither.
- "They misunderestimated me."
Microsoft Season. Patent Season. Microsoft Season! Patent Season!
The answer is C none of the above.
You were blend when we walked over to talk with you, now we're leaving you blind. Sure, we could've helped you out of your predicament of being blind, but then that kind of charity would be robbing the service industries that generate tax revenue; a bank loan to be a blind cane and fancy old-people cyclops sunglasses, then the education system for teaching you how to make a living while blind, and the biotech industry that would require you take a bigger bank loan to regenerate optic nerves to implant censors allowing you to see yourself in the mirror after panhandling all those years without sunscreen to enjoy your last years with cancer and herpes.
... but not for their sake.
If MS finds that they are losing enough from software patents, maybe they'll lobby to get them declared invalid.
Common sense?
Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
The lawyers.
Reasoning: If MSFT loses, they might start lobbying for abolition of software patents.
If Microsoft loses, we get to take joy in the loss. If Microsoft wins, we get to take joy at Microsoft for narrowing patent law to its own long-term disadvantage.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Well, you have to bet on Microsoft. Come on -- it's our Supreme Court and the biggest corporation has the most rights.
I first parsed that as "Microsoft Patents Going to the Supreme Court" and thought "What a brilliant strategy! Making people use your patent to fight your patent claims!"
Microsoft will not be arguing software patents are ludicrous before the supreme court; it will be arguing the patents are not valid. Translated: the rules apply, just not to Microsoft.
Let them get bitten in the ass by their own supported rules, and hope it happens enough times so they'll reconsider their stance.
It's not as if the patent system is on trial.
MS will continue scamming, bullying, and extorting; regardless of the outcome of this trial.
Other companies will also attack MS, but MS has the upper hand, because MS has more money.
I dunno, because I don't have an irrational hatred for companies nor do I really support them in any way aside from buying their products... Poor Slashtards, please get professional help. You're a bunch of raving lunitics.
Both Microsoft and software patents are evil and powerful, but Microsoft's power is ebbing away while the corrosive effects of the patent system are still hurting software developers. I'm rooting for Microsoft 100% in this case since the patent system, much more than Microsoft, is capable of leeching the lifeblood from software development.
If Microsoft is successful here, then it will be easier to invalidate questionable patents, especially when using prior art or other evidence not considered by the Patent Office. This is significant because the Patent Office often does not have the time or resources to search all possible prior art, especially art that has not been neatly cataloged and indexed for search (e.g. that ancient piece of software you remember using in the 80s that did exactly what the patent claims but isn't sold anymore).
An important feature of this case is that even if Microsoft wins at the Supreme Court level, the patent may still be found valid and infringed. If Microsoft wins and the case goes back down to the trial court, it's entirely possible that the judge will say "nope, the evidence still doesn't meet the new lower standard; pay up."
Relatedly, Harper v. Maverick Recording Co. (Docket number 10-94), an RIAA case which concerns the innocent infringer defense, was denied cert at the same conference.
I will route for the person that knows the difference between route and root.
See my subject above metrix007? Prove to us all that you've actually done some work in programming by showing us some work you've done online such as a program that's been rated well in the eyes of others in written publication. Otherwise? All your *talk* is nothing more than that, and bullshit walks (and you're the bullshit).
It seems to me that a SCOTUS ruling for Microsoft in this case would likely have numerous significant repercussions for patent litigation -- for instance, (1) it could leave many more patent holders vulnerable to harassment by excessive litigation from large corporations; (2) it would probably serve as the basis for invalidating many patents post-issuance; and (3) it could give the FTC more leverage in ending reverse-payment settlement agreements. I think this is a case in which the Court should very seriously and carefully the policy basis of the current law and the consequences if it is overturned.