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."
they have a problem with patents and want something else so they can be the only rulers?
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?
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.
IMHO it is more good then bad. It takes someone as big as MS to get slapped by this nonsense before anything will change. Now, that said, it will probably get bad again before it gets better considering MS statement on the results. Rather then meaningful patent reform that levels the field for everyone I anticipate MS. Oracle, IBM, etc. will all get together to write the changes to the current legislation; somehow I don't think small inventors will be on the top of their priority list...
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"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.
Someone needs to let Paul Allen know about MS's change in attitude about patents.
"We want our cake and eat it too."
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
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.
That's like asking which dog you'd back in a dog fight to the death.
We want the fighting ended. MS is just one of hundreds who are a little too eager to participate in these bloodsports. This time, MS's dog lost. Will this inspire MS to take a step back and rethink the whole thing? Not likely, but we can hope.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
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.
I think most of the big software vendors are starting to really believe this. MS has been advocating for patent reform in more than just lawsuit defenses. They're paying lobbyists to say the same thing. That doesn't mean they won't keep filing patents, and filing lawsuits based on those patents, until the day any reform takes place though. There's a difference between seeing something needs to change, or even advocating for those changes, and letting the currently unchanged rule bite you in the ass. No corporation is going to take a moral stand on the issue in a way that opens it up to potential liability or disallows potential profit. All the big players (except maybe Oracle), seem to be realizing that the current system doesn't favor them, it favors the patent trolls.
Say whatever bad things you want about MS, Apple, Google, and the like, but all of them are in essentially the same boat. They actually make real products, that they release and sell. Whether those products are pure software or software and hardware synergies, they are real products which really make money one way or another. Patent trolls don't make anything, they just patents stuff and wait around for someone to do something similar so they can sue. The patent portfolio based "mutually assured destruction" pacts that keep the big players off each other's backs simply don't work on the trolls, and it's going to start costing the big boys more and more money. So now they have a good reason to change the system they've been abusing for the last decade.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Complete bull shit!
But I guess being a Microsoft troll the truth doesn't matter.
FYI Microsoft is using their own dubious patents to sue Android.
This is GOOD because a powerful company finally got shut out by the current law, enforced "equally" for once.
All the big companies negotiate their own deals out of court with big checks so the bad laws are on the books for the rest of us like a hammer. This case the plaintiff wanted Microsoft shut out.. They didn't wantba deal.
Of course we won't get a BETTER law out of this, they'll just put some mandatory RAND terms.. For "$1 million" which wipes most upstarts like iOS devs (this weeks other case) from the board but makes it "fair" for everybody else. Most Americans are employed at ( or own) small businesses which are under 50 employees... Even $1 million is devastating to a business that size, but pocket change to IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, ect.
This is the fundamental problem of worshiping capitalism. It is like comparing "one man. One vote" to each dollar... But making every decision by essentially simple majority "mob" rule. You're not truly "equal" in our society unless you have $10 million or so of liquid property stuffed in a "mattress" on 640+ acres otherwise you still are beholden to Banks, insurance, farmers, government, etc for all the important things. Like making sure your pension, retirement is actually AT the bank when you retire, or that you won't be bankrupted by expensive medical care (Most truly serious stuff Starts at $100k now) or that a simple lawsuit wont bankrupt you. That's why so Many actors, rockstars, and athletes are poor five years after quitting.. That $100k FDIC should really be $1m to account for inflation in the last 30 years. Little people are really, really screwed.
Shopkeeper: Take this object, but beware it carries a terrible curse! ...That's bad.
Homer: Ooh, that's bad.
Shopkeeper: But it comes with a free frogurt!
Homer: That's good.
Shopkeeper: The frogurt is also cursed.
Homer: That's bad.
Shopkeeper: But you get your choice of toppings.
Homer: That's good!
Shopkeeper: The toppings contain potassium benzoate.
[Homer looks puzzled]
Shopkeeper:
So now they have a good reason to change the system they've been abusing for the last decade.
Maybe it was second nature, or just the context of your point, but what you said is corporations changing the system they have been abusing.
What is tragic to me is that it is not the citizens being represented here. The whole system does not work at all for the consumer or society. We need major reform of the entire copyright/patent/trademark system starting with the fundamentals...... that public domain is the most valuable thing we own and that it needs to be protected first.
The way corporations want it, and that includes MS (and especially Disney), is that the public domain does not exist at all. They keep pushing for permanent ownership of ideas and expressions without the possibility of being put *back* into the public domain.
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.
Patent trolls don't make anything.
Well, i4i does at least make something. They now sell a utility that undoes the damage caused to documents by Microsoft's forced removal of their custom XML feature.
As far as I can see, they omit from the page that they are the reason the feature was removed.
I meant more "advocating for changing the system they've spent the last decade abusing". Doesn't change your point though. I totally agree. I'm not an anti-IP fanatic, I think the existence of copyright and patents are fine and good for society overall, but several things about he current system clearly need to change. Shorter copyright terms, more controls on what is or isn't patentable, these and many others need to be implemented before posterity loses it's access to our cultural and scientific heritage.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
What is more like the OP is saying is that the corporations like MS et al have to live within the system as it exists now, even if they want to change it. That means for their survival, they must patent and challenge other patents, since they actually make a product. I believe there is sense in this. I also happen to agree that these business method patents are ridiculous. I also believe that MS should have won this case, and I wouldn't be surprised if the SCOTUS split along party lines again.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Well, another way of looking at it is that it implements the feature they patented... For all intents and purposes, the software existed before the lawsuit. It's just that people are now going to have to buy it rather than rely of Microsoft ripping it off.
True, we want to change the system, but could you please wait until we've sued that pesky Android system out of existence...
Thanks so much,
Microsoft
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
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
That $100k FDIC should really be $1m to account for inflation in the last 30 years. Little people are really, really screwed.
First, it has been upped, originally it was $2,500 (1934)
Second, it is not $100k, but $250k (as of 2008).
Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
Speaking as a turkey, I want Christmas to come early this year!
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
we're already seeing Microsoft using their old vfat patent to hammer the use of Linux and in some cases, they are asking for licensing fees which are about equal to what they themselves charge for the whole OS. I think Barnes & Noble are the only ones fighting this and we've seen HTC is paying $5/dev. So I doubt we'll see Microsoft 'learning' from this and changing their ways or even joining a fight to change the patent laws if that means they lose the ability to hound Linux vendors for money for MS claimed IP.
I still get laugh out of the name of the company, i4i( eye for eye as in 'an eye for an eye' ), considering they went after Microsoft.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
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.
As far as I can see, they omit from the page that they are the reason the feature was removed.
Did you look at the right hand side "industry links" menu, the link named "i4i v. Microsoft Patent Case Information" ?
A name like i4i is inviting Microsoft to take an eye for an eye and sue them right back.
Well, i4i does at least make something. They now sell a utility that undoes the damage caused to documents by Microsoft's forced removal of their custom XML feature.
Yes, they sell a utility providing very useful (and patented) functionality to Word users - just like they did when Microsoft blatently cloned an earlier version of said utility, called it custom XML and integrated it into Microsoft Office. The court case even turned up internal Microsoft memos gloating about this and about how they would drive i4i oout of business by integrating the functionality of their main product into Office.
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.
"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.
Someone needs to let Paul Allen know about MS's change in attitude about patents.
When Microsoft speaks of "true innovation" it does not mean what you or I or any normal person would mean. Microsoft's "right to innovate" has historically been an euphemism for its right to disregard antitrust law. With Microsoft, words are never enough. You should judge Microsoft by its actions.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Wow.
Really?
That's like saying sunlight and the Sun don't have anything to with each other. Photons and Plants? I guess not either?
Public Domain means that it is freely available to the public. A patent expires.... and guess what? The technology, methods, and more legally specific, the *claims* are no longer a publicly granted legal entitlement covering their profit and use.................. and that means it is available. To the Public. Available to the Public.
LOL
All patents, copyrights, trademarks, whatever return to the Public Domain once they expire.
ROFL.