Microsoft slapped with $388 million patent verdict
Microsoft was hit Wednesday with a $388 million verdict in a long-running patent infringement case.
In the suit, Uniloc alleged that Microsoft used its patented technology as part of the software giant's product activation methods. A federal jury in Rhode Island found that Windows XP, Office XP, and Windows Server 2003 infringed on a Uniloc patent.
Microsoft said that it will appeal.
"We are very disappointed in the jury verdict," Microsoft spokesman Jack Evans said in an e-mail. "We believe that we do not infringe, that the patent is invalid and that this award of damages is legally and factually unsupported. We will ask the court to overturn the verdict."
Microsoft had initially won a summary judgment ruling, which would have ended the case in its favor, but Uniloc appealed that ruling and a federal appeals court last year ruled that the case needed to go to trial with regard to two counts. The trial began March 23.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
Please read the article, then comment. They won, there was an appeal, then they lost. Now it is MS turn to appeal. This is how the system works.
BTW, there are lots of other companies that are involved in other patent infringement cases, such as Apple with their multi touch system, IBM, etc. There is nothing special with MS case.
God forbid a company want to make sure someone isn't stealing their product.
Activation takes under a minute and your done if you genuinely bought the product should you not be worried?
You must assume people are criminals if you lock your car or lock your house its the same concept...
Frankly, the INSTANT I buy a game..... CRACKALACKA! Because I am NOT going to allow any company to tell me what I can and cannot do with my legal bought product via their DRM. They can stick that up their butts like it is a 40 foot long, rezor-sharp pole!
Time and time again it has been demonstrated that DRM does not work. Stardock are, in the meantime, laughing all the way to the bank with zero DRM and six figure sales.
In the meantime, Mr Dee seems to have forgotten the number of legitimate customers who were locked out of Windows when WGA was introduced (is that still happening BTW?). Nope, not customer hositle at all.
Lerianis3: Agreed. Had one game where the install disc was slightly unbalanced, insisted on the disc not only being in the drive but constantly spun up which made a lot of noise. One download later and the silence was truly golden.
"Oh you mean how the MPAA treats us all like criminals the way they put that stupid FBI warning before every movie you have legally purchased and doesn't deter piracy one bit?"
To a much lesser extent, perhaps. Of more concerned is DRM on the disc and in the player.
"Get your facts straight before you try and talk to people. Otherwise, you look like an idiot."
You have yet to call into question any fact I mentioned in my post. You may want to actually make a point before implying someone has their facts wrong or that they look like and idiot, otherwise you end up looking like the idiot.
"They're not being treated as criminals"
How so? When one installs a copy of Windows one has to enter a license key then either by telephone or internet contact Microsoft and prove the copy is legitimate before being allowed to use it more than 30 days. One has to repeat this practice if the hardware is changed so much in a six month period. If you run Windows update you'll probably get Genuine Advantage which calls home every so often to make sure the current installation of Windows has not some how become a pirate version since it was installed.
"game makers and other companies have been doing the same damn thing for years so how is MS any different?"
They're not. I've complained about game companies (like EA) doing similar things.
"Activation takes under a minute and your done if you genuinely bought the product should you not be worried?"
The time taken is not the issue. The issue is the presumptions and what happens if Microsoft or a game company decides they do not want to maintain the activation service for a given product. Microsoft has already tried to pull the plug on their music service.
"You must assume people are criminals if you lock your car or lock your house its the same concept..."
Not entirely. No one is paying me nor am I accepting payment for access to either my car or house.
Locks keep honest people honest and present only a minimal barrier to those inclined to steal.
Burns: Smithers, my wallet's in my right front pocket.
...
Burns: Oh, and I'll take that statue of justice too.
SIMPSONS RULE!
Especially Maggie. :-)
For the record, I'm not convinced it has merit either but that's my overall view on software patents.
That said, it makes me smile to see the big convicted monopolist being slapped around. I call it justice, some may call it revenge - but either way it brings a smile to my face. Especially sweet considering WGA is involved - the bitter pill that caused me to choke and gag on M$ trashware to begin with. It's to bad they won't learn from such a small slap, the fine should have been $388 BILLION and a court order breaking the M$ monopoly up.
"In some circumstances, the "software" or digital data may itself be the operating system environment. Typically, but by no means exclusively, examples of operating system environments include the MicroSoft DOS operating system, the IBM OS/2 operating system or the Macintosh System 7 environment."
They have been sitting on this for 16 years waiting on the payout of whoever took the lead in the OS war.
Patents SPECIFICALLY say that if you don't use them within a year, you lose them! The law and jury were STUPID in this case to not just dismiss the case from the courts and fine this company for trying to abuse the legal system.
Cold day in ....down there......
since Pigs do fly
Now go back to work Drones.
Thank You.
The shoe is on the other foot this time isn't it MS? When MS is awarded a patent that should never have been given, and other companies inadvertently use some of that tech, Ms sues them into the ground. After all it will stifle innovation if people use a 30 year old file system that MS doesn't even use any more (for example), but when MS uses tech another company has patented in whole or in part, deservedly or not, MS will appeal and appeal insisting THEY don't infringe other companies patents.
Poetic Justice.
- by Inconnux April 9, 2009 3:26 PM PDT
- My heart bleeds for them
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (66 Comments)