Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Rules Against Microsoft In i4i Case
CWmike writes "The US Supreme Court has let stand a $300 million patent infringement ruling against Microsoft, granting a victory Thursday to i4i (PDF), which filed the lawsuit back in 2007. The legal battle already forced Microsoft to modify certain functionality in its Word application in 2009, when the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ruled in favor of Toronto-based i4i and told Microsoft to stop selling Word in the US. At issue was an i4i patent that covers technology that lets users manipulate the architecture and content of a document, which i4i alleged Microsoft infringed upon by letting Word users create custom XML documents. Microsoft removed the feature. 'This case raised an important issue of law which the Supreme Court itself had questioned in an earlier decision and which we believed needed resolution. While the outcome is not what we had hoped for, we will continue to advocate for changes to the law that will prevent abuse of the patent system and protect inventors who hold patents representing true innovation,' Microsoft said in a statement."
"While the outcome is not what we had hoped for, we will continue to advocate for changes to the law that will prevent abuse of the patent system and protect inventors who hold patents representing true innovation", Microsoft said in a statement.
I wonder if the supreme court will have to pay royalties for the exercise of "Godly Powers?" http://idle.slashdot.org/story/11/06/08/1231254/Man-Tries-to-Patent-His-Godly-Powers
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
they have a problem with patents and want something else so they can be the only rulers?
On one hand, it is a scenario in which MS lost, therefore its good
OTOH its a scenario in which software patents won, therefore its bad
One of the patent hoggers got what they deserved.
The whole patent system needs a revamp but it is to protect us from companies like Microsoft, Apple and whatnot. They are the ones stiffing innovation.
I know it's popular to portray Microsoft as the Evil Empire, but this totally sucks. While you all are laughing at the irony, keep in mind that this is only going to convince big companies like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Cisco, etc. that they need to hunker down even more in developing extensive patent portfolios and vigorously defending them. It's the only way to survive as a business these days, to have enough goods to establish a mutually assured destruction scenario if someone sues you. Unfortunately, it also looks like patent trolls are going to be encouraged from now on. As a society, we've completely missed the narrow window of opportunity we had to change the system to prevent this kind of abuse. I guess we were too busy watching Snooki, American Idol and Dancing with the Stars, I hope it was worth it.
This system is so hideously broken, so apparently messed up with no will or way to change it, that it sometimes makes me want to get out of the IT industry altogether.
I guess we should all be patenting the obvious use cases of all standards.
Same story, different day. What a joke. i4i should go around suing every company using XML with predefined tags.
So you got this weapon you are using against others and now others are using it against you too! Cry me a river Microsoft. You helped to create the problem. Want to save yourself? Help uncreate it.
It's Patent Number: US007251778
This comment was written with the intention to opt out of advertising.
If you run that statement through Google translate and select "English to Microsoftese", it translates it to "We'll continue to lobby for laws that allow us to file patent lawsuits against everyone else, but which prevents anyone else from filing them against us."
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
"we will continue to advocate for changes to the law that will prevent abuse of the patent system and protect inventors who hold patents representing true innovation"
"Too many patent trolls are suing us because we have deep pockets and we'd like to change the rules so that we can still intimidate the little guys, but the patent trolls can't sue us."
That's the only possible change I can think of that would make the system worse.
Then again, $300MM is not much for MS if they can use software patents to spread enough Android FUD to get a toe-hold in the tablet market.
I'm genuinely surprised that MS, Google, IBM, Oracle, etc. etc. aren't advocating to eliminate software patents. Even someone as dumb as a troll knows to sue someone with deep pockets not someone who has nothing.
Let me get this straight... these are the patents MS is suing everyone involved with android over.. (referenced from http://tinyurl.com/4k7zmqb)
- One of the patents in this case enables devices to show the content of a page even while the background is still rendering, allowing users to interact with the page more quickly. (U.S. Patent No. 5,778,372)
- This patent provides information about download status on top of the content display. (U.S. Patent No. 6,339,780)
- One patent enables users to select text, see what is selected via highlighting, and expand the selection in either direction as desired. (U.S. Patent No. 6,891,551)
- Another patent allows people to insert and review annotations without changing the underlying document, and to select annotations and be brought to the related portion of the document. (U.S. Patent No. 6,957,233)
And for these WEAK ASS patents MS thinks the licencing cost owed them is more than their windows 7 licencing costs. Yeah.. no patent abuse here.
MS.. Please GET BENT! Pay your infringement penalty and shut your face!
Mutual Assured Destruction cannot be used to defend against patent trolls. They create no products, therefore cannot possibly infringe on any patents, which means no matter how many patents you have, you can't counter sue them. Their whole business plan consist of buying patent on the cheap, and suing anybody who makes a profit in any area remotely related to the patent.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"We want our cake and eat it too."
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
The obvious issue is whether i4i's invention should've been awarded a patent in the first place. But assuming the patent was valid, another issue is whether it in itself should've been enough to force Microsoft to pull the feature out of Word and pay $300 million in compensation. What actual damages has Microsoft's independent discovery and use of the invention done to i4i's business? The damage award should've been limited to the lost profits that i4i can demonstrate that it may reasonably have accrued had Microsoft not infringed. Not $300 million, obviously a war chest i4i can use to buy more dubious patents and pull similar stunts.
While I agree with you that this is a bad decision with negative consequences for the industry, well, you did mention the irony here so I won't have to explain why I am experiencing a twinge of schadenfreude right now.
I realize that this is Slashdot, &tc... but please read the full opinion. As it makes clear, the Supreme Court (in an 8-0 decision, with the Chief recused) agrees that this aspect of the patent system is broken. As it also makes clear, the responsibility for fixing the broken patent system lies entirely with Congress.
This opinion is a good example of the Supreme Court essentially telling Congress to get its act together and fix the broken patent system. In the meantime, the Court reiterates what the problem is with the patent system in this case, and provides a solution for Congress to implement. But the Court is not empowered to fix the broken statute by itself, so it has to essentially settle for restating what the current broken statute says, and enforcing the law that's on the books.
Since the broken statute is not unconstitutional - Congress was empowered by the Constitution to act, and it did, poorly - the Court can only point out the flaw and hope the Congress fixes it.
Maybe now MS will refocus their considerable lobbying resources to true patent reform since they've now been bitten hard by the current broken system.
Well, 60 million Android phones sold by HTC should cover that. Oh happy happy software patents.
It seems Microsoft's entire defense was based on the fact that i4i was selling software named S4 for a year before filing this patent, and Microsoft claimed that S4 contained the patented technology. However, Microsoft wasn't able to prove that S4 contained the tech, so their argument fell flat. Since MS has to establish the burden of proof and couldn't to the SCOTUS' satisfaction, the court ruled in favor of i4i.
It seems odd that the MS lawyers chose that defense. I wonder if all of us non-lawyers don't really understand what it takes to prove obviousness of a patent.
to what they do best: intimating Linux infringes on their patent troll portfolio.
Apple's OS and Apps use XML out the wazzu. this could be interesting.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Well, then we are truly and fully fucked.
is the fact that Microsoft is just as culpable in pursuing patent claims against others. So pot, kettle, black. Oh the irony. (pun intended) Did anyone else note that the name of the patent company was similar to "eye for an eye"?
Oh where have all the prepositions gone?
As part of the commentary in the ruling, Justice Breyer offered some advice to courts on how they can use facts in court cases about patent infringement. Some patent lawyers think that this may make it easier for juries to overturn a patent. (More in my article here, if you're interested: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060911-microsoft-i4i-patent.html) It's not the same as a ruling that would make it easier for companies to defend against patent infringement suits from bad patents, or if the Bilski case had lead to invalidated "business process" patents altogether ... Yes, the Supreme Court is making it clear that this is up to Congress to fix ... which it really is. But gimme a break ... Members of Congress are a little busy right now arguing over gutting Medicare and scandals involving naughty Twitpics.
Julie
Are you looking for an free alternative word processing program? I highly recommend AbiWord http://www.abisource.com/
How to change the default file type to .doc - http://www.abisource.com/wiki/FAQ/Always_save_as_Word
Looks like they had to pay ... *puts on sunglasses*... an i 4 an i.
YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
They're sitting there making money form HTC off Android phones and have done nothing to deserve it. TBH, I think they deserve a bit more butt hurt over this to return the favour.
This was a reasonable decision. Microsoft was willfully infringing, and their only defense was that some old version of the product which might have contained the patented technology might have been on sale a year before the patent was filed. Microsoft lost on that issue at trial. Microsoft then cooked up a legal theory that they only had to show a preponderance of the evidence to prevail, rather than having to overcome the statutory provision that issued patents are assumed valid. That was a a weak argument; both the plain text of the statute and previous decisions are against it. The Supreme Court slapped it down 8-0. I'm surprised the Court even took the case.
This isn't a major decision in patent law, like Bilski or Zoltek. It doesn't change policy. Read "Microsoft v. i4i: Supreme Court Affirms Strong Presumption of Patent Validity " on PatentlyO.
The SCOTUS isn't in the pocket of big business, just genuinely evil business.
A name like i4i is inviting Microsoft to take an eye for an eye and sue them right back.
Here is why http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36390518 where you troll others, get caught with your pants down, and had to run from a simple question (that showed you're a troll).
I worked with i4i for a little while in the mid-90's. They hadn't been awarded the patent yet, but they had filed. The company's primary focus was writing software that enabled and used meta-maps (based on SGML) that would allow a single document to represent multiple perspectives. They were building a small but growing business based on this idea, with large and respectable clients. Sometime after I stopped working with them Microsoft expressed interest and visited them. Microsoft decided that they didn't need to respect the patent and just added i4i functionality to Word, presumably assuming that such a small company would not be able to sustain a fight against a giant. This type of infringement is why patents are necessary. i4i wasn't then and probably in not now a patent troll. I understand the strong revulsion against software patent trolls, but this is not the case to hang that on.
Maybe you were shooting for a funny moderation?
It willl take more than once bitten to make Microsoft twice shy. They weren't bitten hard, Microsoft have so much cash this was but a scratch.
How ironic that these companies who lobbied and pushed for patents to lock out competitors are now finding it is themselves who are being locked out. We need more patent trolls. Even if this means the patent trolls get rich, this is a better short term proposition that hopefully makes even more plain how the patent system is broken in its current form.
-- Patent hater
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36390518 Because it shows you for who & what you REALLY are, Linux troll?? Absolutely. Caught red-handed, with your pants down troll, lol!
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36390518
Because it shows you for who & what you REALLY are, Linux troll?? Absolutely.
Drinkypoo, caught red-handed, with your pants down troll, lol... can't "face the music" of your OWN screwup, troll???
Again, absolutely.
Seems the troll called "drinkypoo" can troll others, but when it's done to he in a retrolling? He runs away... lol, & from a SIMPLE question.
They should claim compensation from them
No Win No Fee Lawyers
And, that's your problem, troll. Keep trolling others, "ne'er-do-well", and you most likely never will.
I think there is a very simple way to put an end to patent disputes. Ban I4I. Microsoft I believe has the right to decide who is allowed to use their products. They can simple put I4I out of business by forbidding them and their staff from ever using any of Microsofts products including Visual Studio, Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Skype, Windows, Visio, the XBox, etc.
Problem solved. We will see how long a patent troll like I4I could last by being cut off this way. I'm guessing they would go out of business pretty fast.
I'm quite pleased that the Justices defied pundits' predictions and issued this ruling -- I always thought i4i had the stronger arguments, not to mention many years of tradition and precedent on its side. Moreover, I think there's a decent argument that a strong presumption of validity is indicated in the Constitution; and, on a policy note, in countries with weaker patent rights, there lurks always the danger that well-funded entities can use that lesser standard to bankrupt patentees, or even to deprive them of their IP altogether. Thank you, SCOTUS; well done.