Judge orders Microsoft to stop selling Word

On Tuesday, a judge ordered Microsoft to stop selling Word, its flagship word processing software and one of the main components of the Microsoft Office System - namely part of Word 2003 and Word 2007. This also now extends to Word 2010 which contains the same feature set.

Judge Leonard Davis of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a permanent injunction that "prohibits Microsoft from selling or importing to the United States any Microsoft Word products that have the capability of opening .XML, .DOCX or DOCM files (XML files) containing custom XML," according to a statement released by attorneys for the plantiff, i4i, CNET reports. Microsoft stated that it planned to appeal the verdict. i4i sued Microsoft in March 2007 that Microsoft violated its 1998 patent (No. 5,787,449) for a document system that "eliminated the need for manually embedded formatting codes. "

XML (Extensible Markup Language) is considered a "page description language," with one of its key features being that humans are able to read it legibly, not just PC's and other devices. XML allows developers to create their own tags for data.

In May 2009, a jury in Tyler, Texas, ruled in favor of i4i that the custom XML tagging of Word 2003 and Word 2007 infringed on the patent owned by i4i and ordered Microsoft to pay $200 million in compensation.

In Tuesday's ruling, Microsoft was also ordered to pay an additional $40 million for willful infringement, as well as $37 million in prejudgment interest. Microsoft must comply with the injunction within 60 days and the injunction specifically states that Microsoft way not test, demonstrate or market Word products that contain the XML feature in question.

The Microsoft Office system overall generated a 9.3 billion dollar profit in 2008 alone, and this move would hurt that business immensely.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Mobile phone users in the U.S., Canada, Spain pay the most

Next Story

Judge rules against RealNetworks DVD duplication software

202 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

winlonghorn said,
OMG! They have got to freakin be kidding me! Did this judge smoke pot before the hearing or something? The XML standard is meant to be an open standard. WTF Happened to that fact?!?!? I say people march and protest in front of this idiot's courthouse!!!! Screw this crap!!!! This is America not some communist country where we are not allowed any freedoms!!!!!!

U Stupid ass!
This can actualy only happens in faken America! - There is no law and its all about screwing ppl around,.... BTW,... where is your America lately?

I wonder if any connection has or could be made between F/OSS supporters and I4i?

Wasn't it the F/OSS supporters who screamed for Microsoft to embrace "Open Standards" - which brought us to the OpenDocument format and the XML inclusions?

If so, Microsoft has been lead down the primrose path by the F/OSS groups - and Microsoft should sue THEM for collusion.

CENSORED Penguin-fetishists!

I'll better give you my level 9000 antipenguin armor to shield you from his FUD.

I can totally imagine this site cleansed so mindless fanboys!

resol612 said,
I'll better give you my level 9000 antipenguin armor to shield you from his FUD.

I can totally imagine this site cleansed so mindless fanboys!

You should see the comments on the Apple articles.

Would think most people have a licence for Office already or are hanging on for new office. By the time people are buying MS would have sorted this stupidity out.

P.S. I think lovethepenguin works for i4i, how many times can you reply to one thread jeez!

Maybe, maybe not. He seems like he has been seeking vengeance for a long, long time. Help me search if MS has offended him or his family in any way, thanks.

This has got to be the most bizarre thing I have ever heard... So Microsoft is going to have to come up with their own document standard again?

WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT....someone put this in black and white for me....microsoft can no longer make office, or office with word at least? WTF is this? so whats to become of office 2010?

I believe that:

In 60 days, Microsoft will be prohibited from selling any Word edition, or package that includes Word, which contains support for XML-based templates. This is based on the claim that the specific markup used in the templates is a patent-violating implementation of i4i's own add-on.

First thing I thought of when I read this was the jury.. Unless the jury was all made up of tech literate individuals the plainiffs could of led them into believing anything and the defense couldn't do anything to convince them otherwise.

In technology cases like this, I just don't think companies get a fair trial because of the jury not knowing what the hell they are talking about. The jury, "Oh yea, those little icons on the screen you mean?".. Yea big MS doesnt need all that money.. Blah blah blah.

They need literate jury's in order to have complete and thorough tech trials. But then you have to worry about anti-MS fanboys. Its a lose lose situation.

briango said,
Can a district court judge in eastern Texas stop the sell of anything outside his jurisdiction?


Only if the ruling is not appealed or is upheld on appeal.

However, not only is it *likely* that Microsoft will appeal, I know of NO ruling in a similar case in this particular district (this is not even close to being the first software-patent case heard in the Eastern District of Texas) that has survived on appeal (the five cases I'm aware of from the Eastern District were all tossed on appeal).

patents are dumb and stupid and should all be scrapped as companies always wait so they can sue ms or anyone else for a quick buck and that ruling is just dumb.

The real problem are these BS "patents" which are written desciptions usually with no example code. It is the new form of .com camping. Just write up some non sense about a "system" like:

A UI that takes a persnal id from a user that then allows access to data and or items.

IE passwords, pins, pin number pads ect. It is all BS that people and companys can patent an idea not an actual design just because it involves computers.

Microsoft should just acquire i4i. Do it Oracle-style if they refuse. :P

Makes this situation a whole lot easier and probably saves them money too.

mindscape said,
Microsoft should just acquire i4i. Do it Oracle-style if they refuse. :P

Makes this situation a whole lot easier and probably saves them money too.


LOL hell yeah, stick it to em MS, hostile takeover ftw

Osiris said,

LOL hell yeah, stick it to em MS, hostile takeover ftw

And then fire everyone as soon as they do take it over.

I'm sorry but that has to be the most inane rulling I have ever come across in my 20 years experience of working in the IT industry. What a load of CENCORED CENCORED. absoludte rubbish.

I really can't remember, is it still cool to hate MS, or has that idiotic fad vanished?

*looks at LovethePenguin* Apparently some people don't keep up with fashion.

LoveThePenguin needs a warning or restriction or something. Every single one of his posts since joining has been bashing MS.

Well actually Texas is a real cool state, liked the times traveled through it. Don't know much about patents but just glad I would not have to make a difficult decision like the judge had to...or maybe not that difficult. Can't imagine word disappearing. Hope it will get resolved.

If you play with fire, you end up getting burned.

Microsoft has been a Patent troll for more than a decade.

Magallanes said,
If you play with fire, you end up getting burned.

Microsoft has been a Patent troll for more than a decade.


+1
Spot on. Revenge is sweet :P

I wonder if anyone here has ever had a good idea of theirs hijacked. To see a company making $9,000 million PA profit, and only being compensated $300 million for a stitch-up ba$tardisation of their idea. I know I'd smart, and would go after every penny I could (as would / do Microsoft!)

Open office may suck, but so does Office 2007 @ $400 - $600 a go (unless you are a student, and buy the same product for $100) Microsoft only have a monopoly on the Office suite, because they were able to leverage hidden call to the O/S that Lotus Suite were forced to remove from their products. This was back in the days when Microsoft were the darlings of the IT industry, and could screw over everyone.

Eventually you will realize that you get what you pay for. If the price of Office is unacceptable to you then by all means, use one of the many competitors. If you can find one. Last time I checked, there weren't any in a monopoly situation which you claim Microsoft to be in.

Of the 9 billion profit Microsoft earns, only a portion comes from Word and the XML issue is a very small portion of that. Of course, comparing a so-called "ba-tardation" of one idea to an entire suite of software is beyond any logical reasoning.

C_Guy said,
Eventually you will realize that you get what you pay for. If the price of Office is unacceptable to you then by all means, use one of the many competitors.

How can the price of MS office ever be justified? Most people only use the basic features of a word processor etc. Eye candy like the ribbon is just an excuse to sell the same product over and over again. That's why governments around the globe are abandoning it left right and centre.

boho said,
I wonder if anyone here has ever had a good idea of theirs hijacked. To see a company making $9,000 million PA profit, and only being compensated $300 million for a stitch-up ba$tardisation of their idea. I know I'd smart, and would go after every penny I could (as would / do Microsoft!)

Open office may suck, but so does Office 2007 @ $400 - $600 a go (unless you are a student, and buy the same product for $100) Microsoft only have a monopoly on the Office suite, because they were able to leverage hidden call to the O/S that Lotus Suite were forced to remove from their products. This was back in the days when Microsoft were the darlings of the IT industry, and could screw over everyone.

really? I got Office enterprise edition for 19.95....home use program from the army. Best check your #'s

This is going to backfire for "i4i" I have a feeling, because many businesses, online colleges, and so on rely upon the Word application. I guess we will have to resort back to notepad again, or something like that.

Ansturm said,
This is going to backfire for "i4i" I have a feeling, because many businesses, online colleges, and so on rely upon the Word application. I guess we will have to resort back to notepad again, or something like that.

Wooowwww... I'm kinda tempted to reply to every post who didn't read the article.

1) You can still use word if you already have it - the hundreds of millions of users won't throw it away. Mum and pop businesses might be annoyed if they wanted to grab an extra license for now, but that's not some massive backlash like you describe.
2) It's not the whole DOCX format or anything dumb, see above.

"...the capability of opening .XML, .DOCX or DOCM files (XML files) containing custom XML"... that applies to OpenOffice as well. Why didn't they go after them? Oh, I get it, MS has more money.

Microsoft can somehow magically sanction that software that runs on WINDOWS. Crazy company biting the hand that feeds it. =

Microsoft will win as they simply implemented what OpenOffice did for years, which is an OPEN STANDARD.

I'm sorry but this is Bull...... they need a fair response law if a a law affects one company it should affect ALL companies that do the same thing..... this is just a money grab... OpenOffice should be stoped too because of the same feature... along with all other things that save documents as XML...

neufuse said,
I'm sorry but this is Bull...... they need a fair response law if a a law affects one company it should affect ALL companies that do the same thing..... this is just a money grab... OpenOffice should be stoped too because of the same feature... along with all other things that save documents as XML...

It's not the ability to write XML. It's a very specific subset of the features provided therein that is implemented extensively in Microsoft Word templates. That's all.

Also for the record that particular subset is not in the original XML specification and relates to using a map or hashtable of some sort to map the tags so that the tags don't interfere with the document content which is not the XML implementation.

3 things are going to happen here:
Microsoft will win
The judge will get disbarred for being a dumbass
Microsoft will crush that ****ty company

Where did you read that fairytale?
Three things are going to happen here:
(1) MS wont be able to sell word with office due to the injunction, and thus renders MS office unsaleable.
(2) MS will settle the dispute by licensing their patented technology for a very large fee (most likely outcome)
(3) MS will go bankrupt and the world will be a better place for all and sundry

LoveThePenguin said,
Where did you read that fairytale?
Three things are going to happen here:
(1) MS wont be able to sell word with office due to the injunction, and thus renders MS office unsaleable.
(2) MS will settle the dispute by licensing their patented technology for a very large fee (most likely outcome)
(3) MS will go bankrupt and the world will be a better place for all and sundry :)

I just replied to your comment on my post in the RealNetwork DVD software news post.

And you talked about being a MS fanboy, which I'm not for sure. You are likely an anti-microsoft fanboy :)

What ahhell said is not right imho. They will try to settle the dispute and license the patent.

this will have no effect on ofice/word anytime soon. im pretty sure microsoft will appeal re-appeal and use ever other legal resource and leave it tied up in the court rooms for a few more years.
office 2010 will be released as usuall, this might cause a problem for office 2014 or something, but im sure by then xml wouldnt matter becaus ewe will have some other formats!

Interesting no mention of 2004 and 2008 for the Mac, this really is stupid, in the 60 days they have they should appeal and increase production 10 fold.

There's an injunction, and thus they can't sell word until the dispute is resolved. Who's going to buy office without a word processor? Looks like OpenOffice has a good chance of supplanting MS office now

LoveThePenguin said,
Looks like OpenOffice has a good chance of supplanting MS office now :)


No because Open Office is absolute garbage , Ive seen notepad replacements that do a better job of supplementing word .

Says a lot about how god awful your product is when its only chance of getting ahead is if every office suite on the market dies.

bob21 said,
No because Open Office is absolute garbage , Ive seen notepad replacements that do a better job of supplementing word .

Amen.

JonathanMarston said,
Sort of telling that OpenOffice doesn't have a chance until the competition is removed from the market, isn't it?

Speaks volumes about the quality.

Depends on how greedy i4i are, and I suspect that they feel they have nothing to loose by suing OOo since money is being made off of OOo.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

LoveThePenguin said,
No, it applies only to MS word. Hehe.

It does now, but just you wait. If OpenOffice infringes, I'm sure they'll go after it too.

And they are selling an XML authoring product for Microsoft Word!

The patent system (around the world) needs to be revised because there are several holes that allows people without legitimate complains to make tons of money off it easily...

LoveThePenguin said,
MS abuses it just the same as everyone else. They are in no way innocent. Remember TomTom?


Did he say Microsoft was innocent? He said the patent system needs to be fixed so that this can't happen anymore.

You are quick to accuse people of being MS fanboys, when it's quite obvious that you are far, far more than biased the other way...

LoveThePenguin said,
MS abuses it just the same as everyone else. They are in no way innocent. Remember TomTom?

I didn't say that MS was right wth the TomTom case. They took advantage of the same system that is against them on this one.

That's why the whole system needs to be seriously revised.

This article and every single comment is knowledgeless FUD.

It is not the use of XML or the idea of XML that is being challenged here. i4i patented ('invented') the concept of editing XML using a traditional word editor (i.e. creating extensible markups that are able to represent traditional word processing text) and that is probably a discovery of some worth.

The technology in question (as indicated in the article this post links to!) is almost exclusively related to Microsoft Word templates which use this special form of XML markup for easy manipulation.

Please illustrate the facts correctly before starting a FUD war that wastes everybodies time.

Yes, go ahead, stop selling Word to the US. Expect everyone to go absolutely bat**** insane and sue the Judge and Jury for billions in damages for every business out there which uses Microsoft word.

This is a perfect example of the kind of FUD you are generating -- find me a precedent where a judge has been sued for enforcing the law as it is written? It isn't the judge, it isn't the jury, it isn't the plaintiff or the defendants fault -- it's the system. Please god give it a break and stop generating mindless FUD.

omni said,
This article and every single comment is knowledgeless FUD.

It is not the use of XML or the idea of XML that is being challenged here. i4i patented ('invented') the concept of editing XML using a traditional word editor (i.e. creating extensible markups that are able to represent traditional word processing text) and that is probably a discovery of some worth.

The technology in question (as indicated in the article this post links to!) is almost exclusively related to Microsoft Word templates which use this special form of XML markup for easy manipulation.

Please illustrate the facts correctly before starting a FUD war that wastes everybodies time.

This is a perfect example of the kind of FUD you are generating -- find me a precedent where a judge has been sued for enforcing the law as it is written? It isn't the judge, it isn't the jury, it isn't the plaintiff or the defendants fault -- it's the system. Please god give it a break and stop generating mindless FUD.


Yeah, the templates in question are what drives Word, thus making it harder to sell

Owenw said,

Yeah, the templates in question are what drives Word, thus making it harder to sell

I can't remember the last time I used a Word template. I am one of the administrators for an enterprise environment of 25,000 clients and I can count on one hand the number of complaints we had when one of the other admins ran a script that wiped out Word templates (it was a joke!).

I would wager that the average users opens word, starts typing, hits save and is done with it.

Thank god someone has some sense, the fanboi rage is getting out of hand here. It is the process on how Word is using it's interface which infringed on the patent.

Yes the patent system is broke to hell and back, if it wasn't they should have never awarded Microsoft the XML patent on Aug 4th, which you fanboi's claim is a open and free standard to use.

omni said,
This article and every single comment is knowledgeless FUD.

It is not the use of XML or the idea of XML that is being challenged here. i4i patented ('invented') the concept of editing XML using a traditional word editor (i.e. creating extensible markups that are able to represent traditional word processing text) and that is probably a discovery of some worth.

The technology in question (as indicated in the article this post links to!) is almost exclusively related to Microsoft Word templates which use this special form of XML markup for easy manipulation.

Please illustrate the facts correctly before starting a FUD war that wastes everybodies time.

This is a perfect example of the kind of FUD you are generating -- find me a precedent where a judge has been sued for enforcing the law as it is written? It isn't the judge, it isn't the jury, it isn't the plaintiff or the defendants fault -- it's the system. Please god give it a break and stop generating mindless FUD.


+1
Completely agree. The same nonsense is being propagated on this site. It's time for office to ship without a word processor, lol. I wonder who would buy that? :P

RawGutts said,
Thank god someone has some sense, the fanboi rage is getting out of hand here. It is the process on how Word is using it's interface which infringed on the patent.

Yes the patent system is broke to hell and back, if it wasn't they should have never awarded Microsoft the XML patent on Aug 4th, which you fanboi's claim is a open and free standard to use.


+1
Finally some people with sense on this site. Hurray

omni said,

I can't remember the last time I used a Word template. I am one of the administrators for an enterprise environment of 25,000 clients and I can count on one hand the number of complaints we had when one of the other admins ran a script that wiped out Word templates (it was a joke!).

I would wager that the average users opens word, starts typing, hits save and is done with it.


You use a template when you create a new word document. Even if you don't know it. It's called "normal.dot"

Yes, go ahead, stop selling Word to the US. Expect everyone to go absolutely bat**** insane and sue the Judge and Jury for billions in damages for every business out there which uses Microsoft word.

Someone needs to file a similar claim in the EU. That would put a dent in their income, hehe. Who's going to buy their office suite without a word processor, haha, loving it xD

I havn't even heard of i4i before this. Taking a quick look at their site, it seems they provide an add-in or something to that effect for word, which does exactly what word 2007 does with docx. If only microsoft complied completly with the open document standard, there would've been no issues. Still this is a big load of rubbish.

fear-otaku said,
I havn't even heard of i4i before this. Taking a quick look at their site, it seems they provide an add-in or something to that effect for word, which does exactly what word 2007 does with docx. If only microsoft complied completly with the open document standard, there would've been no issues. Still this is a big load of rubbish.

An add-in for Word? So you're telling me these idiots tried to get Microsoft to stop selling the product that's required for their own product to work? o.o;

Didn't any of you read the story - the patent was granted in 1998 and it was a jury found them guilty.

Microsoft regularly threaten anyone they feel like with patent infringement.

As far as I am aware they have done this type of thing before - remember the disk compression issue over Dos 6 ?

What goes around comes around - fair enough I say.

All this bleeding heart fanbois bleating over one of the richest and most aggressive companies on earth is laughable.

PS They will probably end up buying the company in order to avoid the pay out - thats the way rich corporations get to act like they do if they lose in court.

Roscomac said,
As far as I am aware they have done this type of thing before - remember the disk compression issue over Dos 6 ?

Yes, but STAC didn't try to sue for until after Microsoft bought it. If STAC had left well enough alone they wouldn't have been counter sued for illegally reversing the DOS kernel (to tie Stacker in to the OS like drivespace/doublespace was) and might have still been in business today.

OT:

Has i4i ever claimed infringement on any others before this? If not, I don't see how this made it to court. It would seem to me that to protect that patent that they'd have to go after anyone and everyone who uses it. It does seem that it's business as usual where companies don't take any measures against anyone except Microsoft.

Owenw said,
Well the point is they dont have to pay. They already paid once. This is a re-ruling of the SAME case.


Sounds to me like they are stealing an idea from the playbook "double Jeopardy".

Roscomac said,
Didn't any of you read the story - the patent was granted in 1998 and it was a jury found them guilty.

Microsoft regularly threaten anyone they feel like with patent infringement.

As far as I am aware they have done this type of thing before - remember the disk compression issue over Dos 6 ?

What goes around comes around - fair enough I say.

All this bleeding heart fanbois bleating over one of the richest and most aggressive companies on earth is laughable.

PS They will probably end up buying the company in order to avoid the pay out - thats the way rich corporations get to act like they do if they lose in court.

+1
Absolutely correct sir. I salute you MS have had this coming for a long time. (snipped)

JonathanMarston said,
How about we hope that our stupid patent laws get fixed so that no company can pull this kind of crap in the future?

+1

Definitely. Software patents suck.

So what software does i4i develop that uses this patent? I have a feeling it's going to be none. Which means they've been sitting in this vague patent for 11 years, waiting for a big player to make this mistake.
I wonder if I made a vague patent for a 'water distribution system'...could I then sue the water company because they provide water to people?
Before the flamers begin, I'm not saying "OH MY GOD. XML IS VITAL TO LIFE!!". What I'm saying is vague patents should not be allowed. Also, if you make a patent then you need to show you actually use it or are at least researching how to use it. If neither of these two conditions are met, then you lose the patent.

I really wouldn't be concerned, Microsoft will have the verdict quashed and will start appealing and spend years and years in court and continue selling Word and the Office suite.

How can they patent something from an open standard!!!
Oh i hope i4i has infringed on some microsoft patents, i really do.
Seems to be the trend lately, sue microsoft, we aint doing to well lets blame and sue micosoft.

Funny thing is i bet i4i use microsoft office......

Hmm, I notice that Neowin has a Bold button in the text editor here. It's eliminating my need to manually embed formatting codes, but they didn't sue Neowin for it, therefore they failed to protect their copyright. Case closed.

omnicoder said,
Hmm, I notice that Neowin has a Bold button in the text editor here. It's eliminating my need to manually embed formatting codes, but they didn't sue Neowin for it, therefore they failed to protect their copyright. Case closed.

IIRC that rule applies to trademarks, not copyrights.

dead.cell said,
Hahaha you thinked this hypocrisy is? Evil does is as money!


I "thinked"? I am tired of xenophobic arrogant americans always bashing the EU and calling them money grabbers and corrupt for enforcing the law. Now your own people are doing it. What, no one calls Texas a corrupt and money hungry state?

No one bashes the EU for upholding the law. The EU gets bashed when they get low on funds and come up with a pitiful excuse to extract it from Microsoft. They need to devise a new revenue stream.

And secondly, I see few people bashing the EU while defending this ruling therefore there is no hypocrisy.

rpsgc said,
I though the EU was the evil commie greedy corrupt money grabbers How does hypocrisy tastes like?

Coming from the country that spawned enron?

LoveThePenguin said,
Coming from the country that spawned enron?


Yea, I forgot.. we all got together and started up Enron. I forgot all about that meeting. Thanks.

By the looks of things, the company that sued them claimed to have a patent on the XML document standards that Microsoft is using. However, my question is "How can they possibly patent an open standard?" This is crazy! It probably will require cash compensation, yes. It is sad, but obviously "Money makes the world go 'round!"

Wow, didn't expect this first thing this morning! I am not too clued up on the dev side of IT as much as I should be, but waht exatly have they done wrong, include XML in Word to make it more cross platform compatible? And this is what has got them into hot water?!
Would I be correct in guessing that Microsoft can watch this go away if they pay another $x00 million in compensation?

Many people who have not been to Texas seem to think the weirdest ****. I mean, supposedly, we're all half retarded, homosexual hating, gun toting god believers who still ride horseback.

jesseinsf said,
texans are wierd and texas is one of the spamming states and also consists of many pyramid scams.

The article is misleading - while it is a judge in Texas it is not a state court. It is a federal court and it's ruling therefore applies nation wide; the use of Texas here is simply misleading. The only thing worth mentioning is that the particular federal court is usually fairly friendly to patent holders..

I am from Texas and I have to say that we are no more weird than anyone from Mississippi, Alabama or Georgia. In addition I have a business opportunity for you... as long as you aren't gay, carry a gun and believe in God. The great part about it is that all you have to do is recruit people and you can make as much money as you want.

What crap are they going to pull next? Sue them over WPF? It is based off of similar technology isn't it?

EDIT: oops, better not give them any ideas huh? lol

The Microsoft Office system overall generated a 9.3 billion dollar profit in 2008 alone, and this move would hurt that business immensely.

I hope this was sarcasm, lol.

9.3 billion dollars - profit - one year - off of one software suite. jesus.

DomZ said,
I have a feeling they meant revenue
No, they meant profit. The revenue for the business division (includes Office) was 19billion USD in 2008, with 12billion USD in operating income. Include items below the operating income line and you get to around 9billion USD. Note that "billion" means "one thousand million" in the US.

LoveThePenguin said,
That's changing now that OpenOffice and Google Docs are gaining traction.

LMAO - keep on living in your dream world. Hope it's cosy there.

shawncm217 said,
I thought XML was an industry standard. How do you have a patent on an industry standard? WTF?

The same way company can patent food. like corn, etc...

It's a patent on a methodology/convention, not the underlying standard. Yes software patents should be abolished, but you don't see MS donating its vast portfolio to the public domain do you?

OMG! They have got to freakin be kidding me! Did this judge smoke pot before the hearing or something? The XML standard is meant to be an open standard. WTF Happened to that fact?!?!? I say people march and protest in front of this idiot's courthouse!!!! Screw this crap!!!! This is America not some communist country where we are not allowed any freedoms!!!!!!

winlonghorn said,
OMG! They have got to freakin be kidding me! Did this judge smoke pot before the hearing or something? The XML standard is meant to be an open standard. WTF Happened to that fact?!?!? I say people march and protest in front of this idiot's courthouse!!!! Screw this crap!!!! This is America not some communist country where we are not allowed any freedoms!!!!!!

what the hell communism got to do with it? why americans feel the urge to slap the communism word everywhere, even if not related? If they infringed the patent, they have to pay.

law is law.
communism got nothing to do with it, and got nothing to do with your so called freedoms.

winlonghorn said,
This is America not some communist country where we are not allowed any freedoms!!!!!!

Uh, being a US citizen, I'm not exactly sure you're from here...

Last time I checked, MS didn't use the standard XML format that is standardized... they came up with their own proprietary version. That could have changed, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

vaximily said,
Last time I checked, MS didn't use the standard XML format that is standardized... they came up with their own proprietary version. That could have changed, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong.


Ok, I have to make some corrections and apologize. I was just in shock last night when I saw that and it was late. I reacted before I had time to think it over. You are correct that it is the method based on the standard that is in question. Sorry that I came across so strongly on this post. As far as my comment about this being America and not a "communist" country, I was simply trying to convey that it seems to me like companies are not permitted to peacefully conduct business like they used to be able to. All of these lawsuits are annoying and ridiculous and I agree with the fact that the patent and copyright system needs an overhaul badly! Again, sorry about the misunderstanding.

winlonghorn said,
OMG! They have got to freakin be kidding me! Did this judge smoke pot before the hearing or something? The XML standard is meant to be an open standard. WTF Happened to that fact?!?!? I say people march and protest in front of this idiot's courthouse!!!! Screw this crap!!!! This is America not some communist country where we are not allowed any freedoms!!!!!!

U Stupid ass!
This can actualy only happens in faken America! - There is no law and its all about screwing ppl around,.... BTW,... where is your America lately?

Just another pathetic lawsuit. Microsoft will win and it'll blow over as usual. How can you patent a document system with such a generalized function like that?

Hexadecimal said,
Just another pathetic lawsuit. Microsoft will win and it'll blow over as usual. How can you patent a document system with such a generalized function like that?

How can you patent a generalised name storing convention? You guessed it MS did it, and they sued TomTom over it. I Have zero sympathy for this tyrant.

LoveThePenguin said,
How can you patent a generalised name storing convention? You guessed it MS did it, and they sued TomTom over it. I Have zero sympathy for this tyrant.


You can't, and they didn't. They patented their method of storing long file names and the method was copied.

GreyWolfSC said,
You can't, and they didn't. They patented their method of storing long file names and the method was copied.

I think he means there were question marks over the patent in the first place. The real point here is the software patent system is broken, irrespective of who is suing who. It stifles proper competition and innovation, and puts money in the pockets of lawyers. (What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.) The ultimate loser is the consumer.

Now what? Would this effect Word 2007 at all? This might be a good chance for openoffice to make their move, I guess.

Owenw said,
It may end up that MS pushes an update that actually removes functionality, you never know..

Losing this feature would truly suck.

mikeaag said,
surely openoffice also infringes on the patent? as openoffice pretty much does everything word does?
Indeed it must, it opens all of the listed formats.

mikeaag said,
surely openoffice also infringes on the patent? as openoffice pretty much does everything word does?

Yep. Their OpenDocument Text format is very similar to OfficeOpen XML (the one used in word), so they're violating too.

mikeaag said,
surely openoffice also infringes on the patent? as openoffice pretty much does everything word does?

I believe the suit revolves around a single xml file, whereas OO uses an archive that contains multiple files. Or something of that nature.

Majesticmerc said,
Yep. Their OpenDocument Text format is very similar to OfficeOpen XML (the one used in word), so they're violating too.

You have it the wrong way around. The OpenDocument format has been around far longer than MS's format. Not only that, but the OpenDocument format is ISO approved.

LoveThePenguin said,
You have it the wrong way around. The OpenDocument format has been around far longer than MS's format. Not only that, but the OpenDocument format is ISO approved.

ISO approved doesn't mean that it's not breaking the patent and according to this ruling would be in violation. Yes this would affect OpenDocument as well.

Don't worry about it to much, MS will continue on with Word even if they have to give iEi a truck load of money. There not going to lose 9.3 billion dollars a year to anyone.

Skadi said,
And then people say EU is weird with case against Microsoft. :)


Just because Hitler killed people doesn't mean that Stalin is less evil.

Hope you got my point.

FoxieFoxie said,
Just because Hitler killed people doesn't mean that Stalin is less evil.

Hope you got my point.

Excellent comparison.

FoxieFoxie said,
Just because Hitler killed people doesn't mean that Stalin is less evil.

Hope you got my point.

I agree

FoxieFoxie said,
Just because Hitler killed people doesn't mean that Stalin is less evil.

Hope you got my point.


So your point is that they are both weird? So all the people whinging about EU should shut up, because the US has bad laws as well?

So your point is exactly the same as Skadi's point, except you managed to invoke godwins??

During Stalin's rule there was something in the neighborhood of 35,000,000 who either killed out right, or just disappeared off the face of the earth. The only reason Hitler's killing's were noticeable was because of WWII.

Just thought I throw these in here because these two were murdering B........ , hence, not really related to this topic.

I can't believe so many people are surprised about this.
This is what should be expected with patent laws the way they are.

Still don't understand why Linux fans want to see MS fail so badly. If MS went under, um...

Apple would destroy Linux. It wouldn't even break a sweat in the process.

Joshie said,
Still don't understand why Linux fans want to see MS fail so badly. If MS went under, um...

Apple would destroy Linux. It wouldn't even break a sweat in the process.

hehe, if MS went under, the whole world would be flailing helplessly for months or even years as companies and governments get everyone re-trained on Apple or Linux because their Microsoft products would be growing out of date, closed source, and unsupported somewhat.

In fact, it would probably help everyone to just release all the source code and let Windows communities patch stuff up themselves in such an event.

LoveThePenguin said,
Today justice prevails.

Goes to show you don't think. Linux and anti microsoft bashers are laughing except they don't realize that this also means Open Office etc. are also affected by this ruling.

Hackersoft MS MVP said,
Goes to show you don't think. Linux and anti microsoft bashers are laughing except they don't realize that this also means Open Office etc. are also affected by this ruling.

The patent only applies to MS office, sorry fella

LoveThePenguin said,
The patent only applies to MS office, sorry fella :)


For now... Until someone usees this ruling as a basis to sue Open Office.

Tim Dawg said,
For now... Until someone usees this ruling as a basis to sue Open Office.


Except no one will sue them because they won't get $200 million out of it. Everyone wants to sue Microsoft cuz they are huge and they think can get money out them. Unfortunately, they usually do. I don't know the details of this particular case, so I can't comment much on it. I have to imagine that Microsoft won't just stand by and say, "Ok, lets stop selling Word", it's too big of a revenue stream. They will probably work out some sort of partnership with i4i.

wakers01 said,
Except no one will sue them because they won't get $200 million out of it. Everyone wants to sue Microsoft cuz they are huge and they think can get money out them. Unfortunately, they usually do. I don't know the details of this particular case, so I can't comment much on it. I have to imagine that Microsoft won't just stand by and say, "Ok, lets stop selling Word", it's too big of a revenue stream. They will probably work out some sort of partnership with i4i.


OpenOffice is owned by Sun, which is part of Oracle. They have a money dump-truck that can be raided too. It doesn't matter if the software's free.

It is a very bad ruling, but hopefully now we will get someone to fix the broken patent system, a system that Microsoft has in the past defended and used to its advantage. Unlikely that things will change.

Kyle said,
Also, I definitely just went on a 10 minute rant over this court ruling on IRC.

It's bull crap man. They even already paid money...

Kyle said,
Well that's a crap ruling.

No, it isn't. The ruling is perfect.
The problem isn't in the ruling. The problem is in the law. Patent laws are stupid.

Kyle said,
Well that's a crap ruling.

What goes around comes around MS sued TomTom because it used a system for long / short file names which it claims infringes on their patents. Of course this was just another F.U.D spreading campaign against GNU/Linux.

In my eyes no one is more deserving of patent lawsuits than MS. A sweet day to be sure

LoveThePenguin said,
A sweet day to be sure :D

Yeah, real sweet. Until Microsoft just axes all the XML formats from Office and puts everyone back on .doc, .xls, etc. forever. Then all the open source dweebs that are cheering now can go back to whining about how un-open Microsoft is.

DanielZ said,
Eh whatever, Pages is way better anyway. I won't miss Word at all, and I have no problems with closed formats like .doc

The thing is, the Pages format is not used by 90%+ of companies. The word format is industry standard.

And plus, iWork does not have even half the functionality of Office.

DanielZ said,
Eh whatever, Pages is way better anyway. I won't miss Word at all, and I have no problems with closed formats like .doc

LOL.. Pages and iWork is a joke.. I can't believe you are serious.

Boz said,
LOL.. Pages and iWork is a joke.. I can't believe you are serious.


Yes, I can't believe he's serious either hehe

Boz said,
LOL.. Pages and iWork is a joke.. I can't believe you are serious.

Why out of curiosity? I'm a long time Word user and recently bought a MBP -- out of habit I used Word for a while on OSX when I decided to give the latest Pages a shot and I really enjoy it - especially for white papers or research reports that require a lot of images since Pages treats everything like a floating text box. Images and tables in word drive me crazy with all the different overlay/move types -- in Pages you click and drag and it's there.

mindscape said,
The thing is, the Pages format is not used by 90%+ of companies. The word format is industry standard.

The thing is, Pages exports to DOC, RTF and PDF just fine.

mindscape said,
And plus, iWork does not have even half the functionality of Office.

Ever stop to think about that the vast majority of users don't need all the functionality Office offers?