Eolas Sues Again: This Time, Facebook, Disney and Wal-Mart

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Eolas Sues Again: This Time, Facebook, Disney and Wal-Mart

Posted by timothy on Thursday September 13, 2012 @06:39AM from the little-people dept.

judgecorp writes "Eolas, which claims to have patented key aspects to web browsers, is suing again, this time targeting Facebook, Disney and Wal-Mart for infringing hypertext patents. Eolas settled with Microsoft and has sold licenses to other players — but two of the four patents in this case have previously been declared invalid."

31 of 97 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Please sue by Compaqt · 2012-09-13 06:41 · Score: 2, Funny

you know who.
Pretty please?

--
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
1. Re:Please sue by MatrixCubed · 2012-09-13 06:44 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Hey Mack, here's a round of appleause for being cryptic.
2. Re:Please sue by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-13 06:46 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  this reminds me of the time my granny janice smith helped me find steve a job. she really loved to help my uncle time learn how to cook.
3. Re:Please sue by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-09-13 06:47 · Score: 2
  
  you know who.
  That could actually be a good way of getting rid of them, unless they have Harry Potter as a board member.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
4. Re:Please sue by MatrixCubed · 2012-09-13 06:50 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  iHear you, bro.
5. Re:Please sue by hairyfeet · 2012-09-13 14:43 · Score: 2
  
  Have you seen the giant pile of money trucks Cook is sitting on? If this company turned out to be a threat he could just buy the damned company and add their patents to their already scary patent warchest, or keep them a separate company and simply point them at Apple's rivals.
  You see that is the problem when it comes to these companies becoming supermegacorps, there really isn't any way for them to truly lose, they can buy their way out of damned near anything. Hell look at MSFT, Ballmer makes Uncle Fester look like a genius and even a decade of him flushing money for one harebrained scheme after another hasn't even made a dent. He could probably go another 20 years shooting his company in the face before their cash flow actually becomes a problem, scary but true, and Cook has a hell of a lot more $$$ to burn than Ballmer.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I claim prior art by WillAffleckUW · 2012-09-13 06:46 · Score: 4, Funny

I claim prior art to the use of the word delcared.
All your words are belong to me.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
1. Re:I claim prior art by WillAffleckUW · 2012-09-13 07:38 · Score: 2
  
  Actually, the article post is misleading in the title. The primary patent holder is in fact UCLA. You'd be surprised how many patents universities hold and then license.
  Sometimes, having the primary patent holder be a public university means that nobody gets to engage in patent wars, as public universities have no incentive to do things that are not in the public good like that. Thus disarming Facebook, Disney, and Wal-Mart (china) from killing off their competitors.
  
  --
  -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
2. Re:I claim prior art by CanHasDIY · 2012-09-13 08:48 · Score: 2
  
  You're off base. Public universities holding patents is nothing even remotely new. Welcome to the results of the Bayh-Dole Act passed in 1980.
  From reading the Wikipedia entry for the Bayh-Dole Act, it seems that, unless Eolas is acting on behalf of UCLA, they have no right to claim patent rights (assuming these patents really are owned by UCLA).
  
  Of course, IANA Patent Attorney, so I readily admit I really don't know how this crap works.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
3. Re:I claim prior art by WillAffleckUW · 2012-09-13 08:58 · Score: 2
  
  Why not? They were already using public funds to help train advocates for illegal immigration.
  Quoting a claim from Faux News is never a sign of academic rigor.
  
  --
  -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
4. Re:I claim prior art by jameshofo · 2012-09-13 09:00 · Score: 2
  
  Can we wait until they finish suing Facebook before we declare prior art? Just this once
  
  --
  Good leaders run toward problems, bad leaders hide from them.
5. Re:I claim prior art by WillAffleckUW · 2012-09-13 09:43 · Score: 2
  
  No. I'm still Mayor of Kaslo BC on Friendster.
  So we can't wait.
  
  --
  -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
only outcome by Nyder · 2012-09-13 06:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

is that lawyers are getting paid.

--
Be seeing you...
Lobbying by Hazel+Bergeron · 2012-09-13 06:53 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why do nerds raise $100ks on kickstarter for computer games, but not the equivalent to lobby government to repeal stupid patent laws?
It would have a much more positive effect on software development in the long run, you know...
1. Re:Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-13 06:57 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Because it would take billions of dollars to outbid the current lobyists?
2. Re:Lobbying by MatrixCubed · 2012-09-13 06:58 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Wikipedia:
  "Lobbying (USA): Lobbying in the United States describes paid activity in which special interests hire well-connected professional advocates, often lawyers, to argue for specific legislation in decision-making bodies such as the United States Congress."
  "Bribery: Bribery is an act of implying money or gift giving that alters the behavior of the recipient."
  Feeding a broken machine the very stuff that makes it broken doesn't make its problems go away.
3. Re:Lobbying by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-13 07:32 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  It would also help to have a coherent narrative about why it needs to be fixed and exactly how to go about it. Almost every single user on here knows intuitively and also based on evidence that "something should be done". Some few of us might even agree on what must be done. However getting more than a few folks to agree on what to do to fix the problem - enough to actually sway the day - we'd need some plan that had the support of a lot of folks. I don't see that today. I see a bunch of "we should do" and nothing that is truly a coherent message. Let's fix it. I'm not smart enough to do it myself. Come up with a great plan and I can help implement it though.
4. Re:Lobbying by Pseudonym+Authority · 2012-09-13 07:57 · Score: 2
  
  Well, in lobbying, you are bribing the lawyers to do something for you, so it releases you from liability. Besides, it's not like they are giving them money directly, only campaign fund contributions, which may or may not be go to their slush fund, so they can keep making money themselves. Think of it as onion routing your bribe.
Makes me wish by JWW · 2012-09-13 06:59 · Score: 3

I feel awful that I have to say this, but it makes me wish that Tim Berners-Lee would have taken out a defensive patent on the web.
Then he could slam ELOAS for all the money they have.
Or to put it more bluntly. I had it with these mother#$%@$ patent trolls on this mother%@$()$ internet!!
1. Re:Makes me wish by serviscope_minor · 2012-09-13 08:43 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I feel awful that I have to say this, but it makes me wish that Tim Berners-Lee would have taken out a defensive patent on the web.
  Nope. The thing is, Eolas have no products and produce nothing, so they cannot be sued for patent infringement. Even if others have patents on braodly the same kind of thing.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
Need....more...money.... by Overzeetop · 2012-09-13 07:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

The reason we don't raise $100,000s to repeal foolish laws is because that's somewhere in the neighborhood of three to five orders of magnitude too low two actually have an impact on the way IP law is written in the US.
There are ~470 members of congress, all of which need to fund multi-million dollar campaigns every 2 years, and we're looking at probably a 10 year time horizon to enact real, meaningful change. At the same time, there are multiple Billion dollar a year industries which reply on patents and copyrights to protect their business model and cash flow.
$100,000 is like pissing into a hurricane.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
1. Re:Need....more...money.... by CanHasDIY · 2012-09-13 07:13 · Score: 2
  
  Don't people have regular incomes? Anyway, you mostly need the attention of the guys at the top, no? Buy the ear of the people who matter.
  Right.
  
  The problem is, those ears are already bought and paid for by groups with far, far more resources than all of geekdom combined.
  
  Money isn't everything, you know. There's also free stuff/food/hookers/etc., job offers, cushy positions as congressional lobbyists...
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Hah by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-09-13 07:12 · Score: 2

When Eolas won the patent case against Microsoft many years ago, lots of people around here were pumping their fist in the air, happy that Microsoft had finally gotten a black-eye over their browser. I remember posting something to the effect of: "You don't actually want Eolas to win this one. If they win against Microsoft, they can win against anybody."
Today I think Slashdotters would agree with me. It's a nice change.

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
1. Re:Hah by Desler · 2012-09-13 07:20 · Score: 2
  
  They also got other big corps to settle like Oracle, JP Morgan Chase, etc. It's no different to the current mobile patent war where people who proclaim to hate software patents or patents in general cheer when the side they hate loses. Even when it means that the very software patents they claim to dislike only gain further legitimacy in the courts. Fanboism trumps logic every time.
Shouldn't there be a consequence by sjames · 2012-09-13 07:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

They are suing over 4 patents, two of which have already been ruled invalid. Shouldn't they suffer a significant penalty for knowingly suing over an invalid patent?
They did sue Apple. Apple settled by pavon · 2012-09-13 07:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Most people responding to you have assumed you are referring to Apple. If that is the case, then you are late. Eolas already sued Apple back in October 2009, and they settled August 2011.
does wal mart still fight every lawsuit? by alen · 2012-09-13 07:44 · Score: 2

i read that years ago that wal mart fights every lawsuit, no matter how minor
in this case, i hope so
Re:Browser Patents by Pseudonym+Authority · 2012-09-13 08:09 · Score: 2

Because they can pay. What is Mozilla or Opera going to pay?
It's not _really_ a live suit by Theaetetus · 2012-09-13 08:28 · Score: 5, Informative

They are suing over 4 patents, two of which have already been ruled invalid. Shouldn't they suffer a significant penalty for knowingly suing over an invalid patent?
I was curious about that, too, so I just looked up the filing documents on PACER. The patents were declared invalid in the Eolas v. Google et al. trial, and Eolas has appealed that decision to the Federal Circuit (which they're allowed to do). This suit was filed with a request to stay all deadlines, pending the outcome of the Appeal in the Google suit.
Basically, this reserves Eolas' filing date for the suit, which may be important for statute of limitations issues or other issues, but it's going to sit there with no requirement for Facebook or anyone else to even respond until the other suit is done. If the Federal Circuit reverses the jury decision and finds the patents valid, then this one can go ahead, and they haven't sued over an invalid patent. If the Federal Circuit affirms the jury decision, then they can amend the complaint to remove the two invalid patents. Either way, Facebook et al don't have to even reply for a year or two.
Re:Can we sue the Patent Office by DragonWriter · 2012-09-13 09:27 · Score: 2

You can sue just about anyone for just about anything.
Whether you can win such a lawsuit -- rather than losing and being ordered to pay the other guys costs on top of it -- is a different story.
Re:If you don't vote Libertarian you ASKED FOR THI by geminidomino · 2012-09-13 11:55 · Score: 2

I know I probably shouldn't feed the political trolls, but... Are you shitting me. I doubt anyone with two neurons to not-rub-together could argue that the Rs and Ds have fucked things up to a point that they're nearly beyond redemption.
And your "solution" to this is to vote for the Randroid, "let the corps do whatever they want", "slavery is legal if it's in the contract" Libertarians? Are you HIGH?