Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Supreme Court To Hear Microsoft-i4i Case Monday

Posted by timothy on from the regulators-like-being-regulators dept.

CWmike writes "Patent attorneys and inventors of all types are closely watching a Microsoft case that the US Supreme Court will start to consider on Monday. The case, which centers on a technology patent assigned to i4i that almost forced Microsoft to stop selling its flagship Word software, could have broad implications in the way patents are awarded and upheld, experts said. Currently, when a patent holder accuses someone of infringing a patent, the burden is on the infringer to prove with 'clear and convincing evidence' that the patent is invalid. In hearing this case, the Supreme Court could decide to lower that standard of proof, she said."

2 of 105 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wrong way round, surely by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the article (above) "when a patent holder accuses someone of infringing a patent, the burden is on the infringer to prove with 'clear and convincing evidence' that the patent is invalid". Surely the burden must be on the patent holder to prove that their patent has been infringed.

    You are mixing up two separate arguments:

    1. The patent holder has to show that the patent was infringed. If they can't do this, then it is game over.
    2. If they can show infringement, then the defendant can argue that the patent should not exist in the first place due to being too obvious, or having prior art etc.

    Changing the rules for the second part does not affect the first part.

  2. Re:So... by Grond · · Score: 4, Informative

    If Microsoft wins this case, its purported 235 patents that Linux supposedly infringes upon (they have yet to list them after all these years because they are likely piss-weak) are further weakened?

    Microsoft is a defendant in about 50 patent infringement suits at any given time. They are the target of far, far more patent infringement suits than they file. It's in their strategic interest to make it somewhat easier to invalidate patents.

    This case also demonstrates the lengths to which Microsoft is willing to go to defend an infringement case. There was a full jury trial, a reexamination at the Patent Office, a (denied) request for a second reexamination, an appeal of the injunction to the Federal Circuit, an appeal of the case itself to the Federal Circuit, and now this appeal to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court agrees with Microsoft, the case will go back to the trial court for a new trial, with, potentially, another round of appeals if Microsoft loses again.