On Friday afternoon, Microsoft filed an emergency motion with the US District Court for Eastern Texas in a desperate try to block a ruling that could force it to stop selling its flagship word processing software, Microsoft Word in 60 days. i4i successfully sued Microsoft in 2007 for infringing on it's patent for "custom XML", a product that is integrated into many of Microsoft's products, including Word 2007 and 2003, .NET and Windows Vista. Judge Davis ruled that only Microsoft Word "unlawfully infringed" on the patent owned by i4i - early last week he ruled that Microsoft must cease selling Microsoft Word with the custom XML in question within the next 60 days, but said that they did not need to update versions already in the marketplace.
Microsoft lawyers pointed out that i4i was a "non-practicing patent owner" and that this meant it was "improper" that they sue for monetary damages. Judge Davis also warned a Microsoft lawyer for "equating i4i's infringement case with the current national banking crisis and implying that i4i was a banker seeking a 'bailout'."
"All these arguments were persistent, legally improper, and in direct violation of the Court's instructions," Davis wrote in his ruling. "Therefore, Microsoft's trial misconduct also supports enhancement."
Microsoft is still fighting the ruling and is arguing that the i4i patent is invalid and that Word doesn't infringe on the patent. Microsoft has said they will appeal the verdict but it seems like the emergency motion is a stopgap step aimed at stretching out the time they have to more than 60 days.
The ruling has gained worldwide attention but many legal experts are saying that it's very unlikely Microsoft will have to stop selling Word altogether. The other issue with the lawsuit is that other companies also possess the same XML technology in a lot of their software - OpenOffice is a good example of this. Many legal and technical workarounds do exist, and Microsoft can begin a lengthy appeal process which would push out the 60 days to at least a year and a half - just enough time to get Office 2010 ready.
I really am not sure if this is extortion or technological terrorism on the part of i4i.
It is not reading an XML file, this does not affect many XML applications. If you actually read the patent, it is doing something new. It makes it a lot easier to change small amounts of content (say in a document), without having to rewrite the entire XML file each time. It is quite clever.
Also, Microsoft were working with this company, i4i, and then pulled out of it, and "innovated" there own solution, which looks EXACTLY the same as i4i's. MS has been doing this stuff for years.
+1
Here is i4i's patent: http://www.patents.com/Method-manipulating...S5787449/en-US/
Here is the ruling: http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/librar...i4ijudgment.pdf
The patent is simply invalid. Not only can prior art be found, what the patent describes is already part of XML and was at the time of the patent filing.
Here is the ruling: http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/librar...i4ijudgment.pdf
The patent is simply invalid. Not only can prior art be found, what the patent describes is already part of XML and was at the time of the patent filing.
Here is the ruling: http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/librar...i4ijudgment.pdf
The patent is simply invalid. Not only can prior art be found, what the patent describes is already part of XML and was at the time of the patent filing.
The patent is simply invalid. In your opinion, which differs from the judge's. Why is the patent simply invalid? I thought that the MS patent for the FAT file system was pretty invalid with plenty of prior art (the German patent office agrees with me, also on at least two previous MS attempts at patenting FAT the USPO also agreed with me) and yet they used FAT patents to sue Tom Tom. I'm not a lawyer and maybe Tom Tom were out of order, but the point surely is that at the end of the day if you use the patent system to your advantage then don't cry when somebody uses it back. In my opinion, that is.
The patent MS sued TomTom for had previously been invalidated, then reinstated. But they still used that against them. In fact, had the suit gone all the way, I'm pretty sure it would have been invalidated once again.
(snipped)
Did you read any of my earlier comments in response to your earlier diatribes (not on this case alone, but your earlier attacks on Ballmer)?
Microsoft's action is a standard tactic used while appealing a civil judgement (didn't TomTom, in fact, use a similar tactic?). It appears to me that you had pre-judged the case. Permissible for a lawyer, but decidedly IMpermissible for a judge hearing a case. That sort of action is termed "judicial misconduct" (the civilian technical term is "stacking the deck"), and in the case of a United States District Court judge, is an impeachable offense. I would wager that Microsft's legal team is doubtless thinking about that possiblity as well (again, a standard legal tactic).
Last edited by rm20010 on 19 Aug 2009 - 13:29
First of all, it's not about reading a standard XML file, it's about adding custom word processing extensions to an XML file. Second, this patent is no more ridiculous than the numerous things MS and Apple have patented. Software patents in general are counterproductive to everyone. But if you're going to play the software patent game, you have play by the rules, and MS is once again guilty.
Surely an overruling in the courts will proceed or a settlement between Microsoft and i4i will take place.
Where did THAT come from???
Surely an overruling in the courts will proceed or a settlement between Microsoft and i4i will take place.
Wait...what? for free?
I highly doubt that.
I believe any distribution free or otherwise would infringe the patent and thus break the injunction. Notice how they are playing for time in order to remove the infringment from their software. Typical MS.
Most likely. They'll probably license the patent's technology for a big pile of cash xD. It's not as if MS are short on dollars is it?
Most likely. They'll probably license the patent's technology for a big pile of cash xD. It's not as if MS are short on dollars is it?
Or simply wait until Word 2010 (which, according to i4i, does NOT violate the patent) ships, thus rendering the entire issue moot.
Surely an overruling in the courts will proceed or a settlement between Microsoft and i4i will take place.
Hehehe....yeah. .distribute Word for free and increase the price on the rest of the office suite huh? what a plan
Really? How so? Because they were contrary to the ultimate ruling?
Davis sounds like a deuche.
Davis sounds like a deuche.
I know, how dare someone rule against Microsoft, they have never done anything wrong ever. I mean, despite stealing this companies technology, after working with them for months. Profiting from this companies hard work, and giving them nothing. And not for the first or second times, but they have done this to many companies over the past (stacker, dr-dos, os/2).
I hope Microsoft actually gets penalized because of this, for once. They get away with so much, they need to start acting decently, and not just hiring PR agencies to make them look good. They need to start respecting other IT companies.
Davis sounds like a deuche.
I know, how dare someone rule against Microsoft, they have never done anything wrong ever. I mean, despite stealing this companies technology, after working with them for months. Profiting from this companies hard work, and giving them nothing. And not for the first or second times, but they have done this to many companies over the past (stacker, dr-dos, os/2).
I hope Microsoft actually gets penalized because of this, for once. They get away with so much, they need to start acting decently, and not just hiring PR agencies to make them look good. They need to start respecting other IT companies.
Um, according to the previous articles on this issue Microsoft had already paid this company upwards of 270 million dollars, so that doesn't sound like Microsoft "profiting from this companies hard work, and giving them nothing..."...
Davis sounds like a deuche.
Yeah, that was a very odd statement. Sounds like he is a deuche... LOL
Actually, it sounds a lot like he had his mind made up well before Microsoft walked in to court...
Because the MS lawyer attacked the reputation of the company unjustly. David vs Goliath, and David won. Good ruling Judge Davis xD.
Davis sounds like a deuche.
I think the word is douche, and if somebody spends their time in a court room winding up the judge (after being warned, as I understand it) then I think perhaps they qualify as douches before the judge does. Surely if you are legal counsel for a major company you should show a bit more savvy?
XD Love it!
As for my view on the issue, people are really picking on Microsoft, and before i get the wonderful "FanBoy" tag, don't bother. I've used Mac's and Linux Distro's and like them all. But as I read in another comment on here, people really are milking Microsoft for all they can, and it does look like it's being used as a scape goat for the economic crisis.
God, im sure if i dug hard enough, they would be infringing a Patent on the toilet seat because they had an Oval shaped object in the OS. (shush...
As for this;
I'm afraid thats what it's all about when your in there.
People seem to forgot that MS aggressively pursues patents themselves. To me they deserve everything they get
People seem to forgot that MS aggressively pursues patents themselves. To me they deserve everything they get
Once is enough. Please don't pepper the same article with the same comments.
Isn't the first time this happened, highly doubt it'll be the last.
ah but tomtom never paid a license for what they used in the first place did they
...The US patent office has granted a Microsoft patent application, 7,571,169, which "... is directed at providing a word-processing document in a native XML file format that may be understood by an application that understands XML, or to enable another application or service to create a rich document in XML so that the word-processing application can open it as if it was one of its own documents. "
The patent, filed in December 2004 and granted on August 4 2009, specifies that this is done using an XML Schema Document (XSD), which contains more information about the document's formatting, and also covers systems that can open the document without using the original word processing software....
Both XML and XML Schema are long-established open standards, designed to do exactly this, among many other functions.
On the face of it, the patent would appear to cover all usage of XML and XSDs in word processing document, which would effectively leave all other modern word processors - and other software that used their documents - liable to licensing by the company.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-329645.html
My god, man, are you on a moral crusade? You don't like MS, we get it.
You don't need to post a reply to every single comment, alluding to MS being evil/corrupt/tyrannical/baby-eaters.
It all leads to what the country needs, patent reform.
I4i not out to destroy MS
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.