toggle

AAPL Stock: 439.66 ( -3.27 )

MacNN News

http://www.macnn.com/articles/03/08/12/microsoft.guilty/

Microsoft guilty of patent infringement

updated 01:05 am EDT, Tue August 12, 2003

", 0, 0);

A federal jury in Chicago awarded the University of California and a browser technology company after finding on Monday that their patents were infringed by Microsoft, according to Reuters: "The suit, originally brought against the world's largest software maker in 1999 by Eolas Technologies Inc., charged that Microsoft had used Eolas' patented Web browser technology which allows other mini-applications to work with Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser, according to court documents. Eolas had originally sought licensing fees that would potentially have totaled $1.2 billion."

by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

industry

toggle

Comments

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 01:25am | report spam | close Reply |
ha ha

ha ha (first post)

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 01:33am | report spam | close Reply |
Will it Last?

It's good news, but how long until some Ashcroft appeals judge overturns it? Sort of puts MS's backing of SCO in an interesting light, too.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 01:40am | report spam | close Reply |
MS legal

Microsoft will of course appeal.

Just another instance of MS legal outlasting a company that Microsoft cheated.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 01:42am | report spam | close Reply |
Monopolists suck

So do thieves.

They are both.

(thanks for the news. me likes this kind of news. juicy!)

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 02:06am | report spam | close Reply |
MS Legal dept busy...

they will appeal, and get off. Nothing changes.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 02:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Chump Change

MS could pay this in a heartbeat. Big deal, minor fine for royally s******* over a company that made their browser worth a damn.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 03:49am | report spam | close Reply |
not a small settlement

this is by no means any small amount of money. i think it is only intended to recompense the loss of revenue not punish. an appeal is not a sure thing. it is sure to delay though but it is a right that everyone has including individuals.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 05:40am | report spam | close Reply |
Stop embarrasing yourself

Ashcroft appeals judge? Gimmie a break!!! The prior administration delayed, stumbled, then set aside all attempts to actually DO anything to Microsoft for 8 years, but they sure talked a lot about what they would have done!
Typically weak comment from the intellectually challenged.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 07:39am | report spam | close Reply |
Anything New?

M$ has been following the same tactics for years. They use someone elses technology or ideas and call them thier own. Just look at thier OS and Finder(Oops! I really meant Desktop). They will stall intil they get what they want. Which is complete and absolute control of everything in the computing world.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 07:56am | report spam | close Reply |
Who's next?

What's to stop Eolas from going after Netscape, Apple (Safari), Sun (Java), and Macromedia (Flash)? They all have features to allow "mini-applications" to be embedded in a web browser. This could get interesting.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 08:48am | report spam | close Reply |
Software Patents are Evil

I just patented the use of a stapler in an office environment for the purpose of gathering multiple sheets of paper together. Anyone that sells or uses staplers must pay me $1.00 per day.

Think this is absurd? Well that's exactly what Eolas did to MS. Applications working inside of other applications has been around for the past 30 years!

You may hate MS, but to be happy about this case is the same as being happy about Apple suing over the use of a Garbage can icon.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 08:50am | report spam | close Reply |
Who's next?

The patent was obvious to thousands of people when it was approved. Of course people that used a browser would want to get past the limitations of non-dynamic content. Why was the patent approved in the first place?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 08:54am | report spam | close Reply |
2 things

First,... Microsoft says they invented this technology of allowing mini-applications to be embedded in a web browser... this concept was shared with the industry. Everyone else did it... now we all know the truth, but bear along..... Microsoft is the supposed inventor, so they should bear the full hit of this lawsuit. If anything... Apple, Netscape, Sun and Macromedia should be able to license this for a very fair fee and or just trade some inside knowledge with Eolas that is of the most ultimate fairness to everyone. Bear on mind I do not know much of Eolas and if they are a bunch of slimy weasles like Microsoft, then take this post with a grain of salt. Again, our justice system is many times fair in some arenas, but in many others like this.... a total joke. Cmon America, why are telling ourselves we are the greatest nation... do not get me wrong... I love my country for all the good things we all take for granted, but our justice system needs an update. Lots of good judges and people, the little guy, who work hard and stand for honest and honorable beliefs and make a difference, but we need big offenders to get a taste of justice... and be forced to play fair... you never know... dare I say it... Microsoft could in the rare and most unlikely future become a good company in terms of it treatment of competition. Okay, nuff on that.

Second.... I seem to remember some Boston company and I am not totally sure if it them or someone else who developed a sidebar type utility or internet remote.. and Microsoft stole the code and even though this was many years ago... they had so much money... now take this one with a big grain of salt... but I also know of many other companies that had their idea that was under lock n key somehow appear in big MS hands... they got hacked... I am not pointing fingers.. but how many of you have heard or experienced this... Next thing they will call their military defense system Skynet and we are all doomed... had to slip that in, hahah

MacMoose

Clive
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2001

0

08/12, 08:55am | report spam | close Reply |
re: who's next?

At least someone gets it. Where does it end? It seems from the Yahoo story that Netscape is safe, perhaps they paid the licence for "plug-ins", which is what we're talking about.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 09:41am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Software patents are

So, you are familiar with all of the intricate details of this court case. They could be suing over a specific piece of code, not the idea of using plug-ins.

Until you are aware of what the case is about, you should hold your criticism.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 10:29am | report spam | close Reply |
Remember Ma Bell?

As the each blade struck the ground under the scorcing sun, whirles of dust were whisked away by the soft, but persistant summer breeze. Billy look around, that's right, he had won, this was all his, his shovel, his plot, his. So what if the other kids said he had cheated, what does it matter, its his shovel, his plot. Billy kept on, shovel by shovel, driven by the thought that the others would come, shovel by shovel, shovel by shovel. Billy built his wall higher and higher, but there was something he hadn't counted on, in building his walls shovel by shovel he had dug a deep hole. Looking up he saw the walls were too close to the edge of his hole, he had made a mistake and there was nothing his shovel or plot could do about it. Poor Billy.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 10:45am | report spam | close Reply |
No - this is bad

NO ONE should have to defend themslves against lame a** software patents. "(Obvious idea) in a web browser" is a lame a** patent. "(Business thing that has been done for thousands of years) over the internet" is the typical software patent. That is what this one it.

This, and just about every software patent i've ever seen has no useful purpose, and does not "further the useful arts and sciences" as is the only reason given for the whole idea of patents in the Constitution in the first place.

There are 1000 reasons to hate MS and what they do - but they have been screwed on this one.

Code is speech - why the h*** should you be able to patent "Stirring and patriotic speech about the Civil War" - to protect the Gettysburg Address?

Code is speech. Code is 1st Amendment. We have the right to code what we want because it is speech, just like this message I'm writing now.

(for x,++, 50); is no different from "I have a dream"

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 12:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
actually

"Code is speech. Code is 1st Amendment. We have the right to code what we want because it is speech, just like this message I'm writing now."

Actually, code is not speech. Just because code may be represented by letters or numbers, does not make it the same as a written document. For example, you could not simply claim you should have the right to the entire source code for Windows, or any other application, because it is considered free speech. Free speech is subject to the rights of others. This is the same reason you cannot shout "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre, then claim free speech. Also note slander and liable laws also fall under this category.

Without knowing the details of this case, it is difficult to comment in specific. However, the "obvious" idea the original inventor had was not obvious at the time. He considered it to be new technology and followed the law according. He then followed the law to file a suit against MS because he felt MS infringed on his patent. The judicial system then agreed with his suit and fined MS accordingly. Now why would he suit MS, verses Netscape, Apple, or any other browser maker? Part of this is money. However, AOL owns Netscape and has equally deep pockets, yet Netscape was not suited. The arguement is that MS infringed on his patent, and used his technology to gain an unfair advantage in the marketplace... basically that MS benefited more than any other company, so they are first in line.

What I think is difficult for most people to realize is that the law does not always conform to your own personal beliefs - especially regarding technology.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/12, 03:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
embedded apps NOT plugins

The patent is not about plugins, it's about ActiveX in particular and enabling stand alone applications to work within each other. IE can "execute a remotely stored program object that has been embedded in a web page." (taken from theregister.com, at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/32281.html)..

In other words, because Windows Media Player application must be installed on a machine in order to view wmv files inline, it infringes the patent. In contrast, Quicktime is not an application.

"Self-contained" plugins don't infringe on this patent, only those dependent on the client-side applications. Thus, there might be a problem down the line for Adobe, because their plugin requires the Reader application executes in order to view PDF's within the web browser window.

Browser developers other than MS have nothing to fear, only patent infringing plugin makers.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/21	Poser, 10, Poser Pro 2014 get subdivision...
05/21	Apple shares executives' opening statements...
05/21	iOS 7 to get Flickr, Vimeo integration...
05/21	Cook pushes for US IP law changes during...
05/21	Cook: US-made Mac will be assembled...

Show All

05/21	iOS 7 to get Flickr, Vimeo integration...
05/21	Cook pushes for US IP law changes during...
05/21	Broadcom 802.11ac chipset spotted,...
05/21	Did Google tease Android �Key Lime...
05/21	Galaxy S4 stock Android �Google Edition...

Show All

toggle

Microsoft guilty of patent infringement

updated 01:05 am EDT, Tue August 12, 2003

ha ha

Will it Last?

MS legal

Monopolists suck

MS Legal dept busy...

Chump Change

not a small settlement

Stop embarrasing yourself

Anything New?

Who's next?

Software Patents are Evil

Who's next?

2 things

re: who's next?

Re: Software patents are

Remember Ma Bell?

No - this is bad

actually

embedded apps NOT plugins

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

Microsoft guilty of patent infringement

updated 01:05 am EDT, Tue August 12, 2003

Related Articles

Recent Articles

ha ha

Will it Last?

MS legal

Monopolists suck

MS Legal dept busy...

Chump Change

not a small settlement

Stop embarrasing yourself

Anything New?

Who's next?

Software Patents are Evil

Who's next?

2 things

re: who's next?

Re: Software patents are

Remember Ma Bell?

No - this is bad

actually

embedded apps NOT plugins

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace