Microsoft asks for stay of Word injunction
Microsoft on Tuesday asked an appeals court to halt an injunction that would force the company to stop selling Microsoft Word in its current form.
A judge last week issued an injunction that would force Microsoft to stop selling versions of Word with a custom XML function that a jury found infringes on a patent held by Canadian software maker I4i. The judge had ordered the injunction to go into effect 60 days after the ruling.
(Credit:
Microsoft)
In its "emergency motion," made Tuesday, Microsoft asked an appeals court to halt that injunction and also to speedily hear the company's appeal, once it is filed.
Microsoft said that it is trying to remove the functionality found to infringe on I4i's patents, but unless it can do so, it would be forced to stop distributing Word in the U.S. market. "Already, Microsoft is expending enormous human and financial capital to make its best effort to comply with the district court's 60-day deadline," Microsoft said in the appeals court motion.
The software maker said the injunction could potentially keep Word and even Office off the shelves for months. "Unless Microsoft is able to redesign Word and push that redesigned version through its entire distribution network by October 10th...Microsoft and its distributors (which include retailers such as Best Buy and OEMs such as HP and Dell) face the imminent possibility of a massive disruption in their sales," Microsoft argues in the court papers.
Microsoft's motion is expected to be assigned to a three-judge panel that would consider the request. The software maker is also expected to file its full appeal shortly. On Friday, Microsoft made a motion to the trial judge in the case to allow the company to appeal the verdict without having to post a bond.
As noted in our earlier coverage, Microsoft has several options, including seeking remedy from the courts, creating a technical workaround that ensures Word is not infringing on I4i's patent, and settling with I4i.
In Tuesday's filing, Microsoft noted that, in the period since the jury's verdict, the U.S. Patent and Trademark office has provisionally rejected the patent in question upon a reexamination and said that the company meets the standard for staying the injunction because it is likely to win its appeal, will be irreparably harmed by the injunction, that i4i won't be harmed by the stay and that the public will "face hardship" if Word or Office is absent from the market for any period of time.
Earlier this year, in the same patent case, a federal jury also awarded I4i $200 million in damages in the case. That amount, in part, was reached by determining that a reasonable royalty for the XML feature was $98 per copy of Word, a figure that Microsoft noted in Tuesday's court filing is more than the retail price of some editions of Word.
For its part, I4i chairman Loudon Owen said last week that his company isn't seeking to crush Word, but rather just to get Microsoft to stop infringing on his company's patents. Owen declined to say what, if any, settlement talks have been taking place between the two companies.
Updates:
In a statement Tuesday, Owen added that the appeal was "fully expected given the significance of the case and the flagship status of Microsoft Word to the defendant. I4i will continue to vigorously enforce its patent," he added. "We firmly believe the jury verdict and judgment were both fair and correct and we have been vindicated through this process."
Microsoft spokesman Kevin Kutz added the following statement:
Today, Microsoft filed a motion with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to seek an expedited review of its appeal and to stay the permanent injunction while the appeal is pending. These filings are not unusual in patent cases. As we've maintained throughout this process, we believe the evidence clearly demonstrates that we do not infringe and that the i4i patent is invalid. We look forward to filing our appeal and to Court of Appeals review.
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. 
Your phrase "a federal jury also awarded Microsoft $200 million in damages" directly contradicts the statement made in your earlier referenced article that says "ordered Microsoft to pay $200 million". "Awarded" typically means "given to" not "ordered to pay".
I'd fix that right away, so no one gets confused.
However, we're looking at an Emergency Appeal over 60 days and all of this stuff would take several months to play out, so MSFTs gamble is to get the injunction lifted, sell their wares, and push through a major legal assault on I4i in the next 60 days. Keep from paying the $200M, keep on shipping product, and fight the original judgement by Appeal, ongoing. With their resources, they can no doubt accomplish that unless they get a very strict Appeals panel and the lower court responds quickly to issuing judgement writs (you convert a court ruling into a writ of execution in order to collect, or to put a judgement lien on the other party's property, which would be Bill Gates house (if he was jointly or severably liable) or at least the Redmond Campus. Once the lien is filed, the I4i can go back to the court and get a Replevin for Sale, which would force MSFT to sell the property or pay the lien. Obviously they don't want to sell the property or add I4i to the title deed, so they would pay.
And that's a judgement award and how you would collect if you were I4i. The injunction is just according to the findings of fact and conclusions of law rendered by the lower court, but in reality it's obviously a form of extortion because MSFT stands to lose so much by stopping sales. I'll bet dollars to donuts the whole matter is wrapped up before the October deadline, but MSFT is going to use that time to reduce the leverage I4i has over them with the judgement award and injunction.
Having said that, I also know that Micro$oft is experiencing now first hand what they did month ago to another company, much smaller company, of which I suspect the majority of readers here would not even know about.
In addition, Micro$oft has been threatening the open source community for years with litigation over alleged intellectual property, without even stating which of the intellectual properties was infringed upon. They do this, because it appears to be a wonderful tool keeping smaller competitors out of 'their' market.
So in this case, even though I see Micro$oft being wronged by yet another software IP bully, my heart fails to feel any sympathy for the big Monopoly in Redmond Washington.
Arthur
IP has a place in this country, including a line in our Constitution. The interpretation of how to allow innovation without others raiding the inventive work, may be up for debate, but the idea of granting a patent is not. Can you cite one country that attempts to uphold the Software IP rights and is ruined by this behavior? It seems to me you are mixing up IP with the ability to monetize open source based software.
I can cite the opposite. China and India both struggle to copy IP from the Western world because their own innovation suffers due to lack of controls to protect IP.
Hey at least they work for cheap.
One thing's clear, it's not just patent law that needs reforming. I don't care how prestigious this guy is or how carefully he was chosen; someone, somewhere, ****** up.
Anyone who's spent more than five seconds around here knows I'm no fan of Microsoft but some things are just plain wrong.
Also good to see MS are pushing to have the patent invalidated. It may or may not affect ODF (latest analysis says nay but I'd like to see that from a company with the resources to really look at it) but it's not good for anyone to have a shonky patent on the books.
I don't need MS Word. It is irrelevant.
Seriously - did anyone not think Microsoft was going to ask for a stay on one of the biggest products they sell?
I figure Microsoft will quietly make some sort of licensing deal, then quietly drop the subject ($200m ain't much to them),
And maybe, you will stop being an Apple shill and a troll some day. Naaaaaah. Not gonna happen.
Or bullying tactics like how Apple arbitrarily banned Google Vioce and other apps from Apple's appstore?
"Let?s talk quickly about Google?s official client app for Google Voice. It?s not the only thing I?m mad about, but it was the final straw.
To recap: Not only was the app rejected, but Apple pulled several other third-party Google Voice apps that had already passed the approval process while still leaving those developers on the hook for refunds to customers with misplaced anger about the removal.
Fact: AT&T sells Blackberries that can run an official Google Voice client. No problems there.
Fact: Apple continues to sell iPhone apps that permit you to send free SMS messages. No problems there either.
Fact: You can still do everything that the Google Voice app would have done by accessing the web interface through Safari, albeit slightly less conveniently. I doubt they?ll pull Safari from the iPhone, although that would be the logically consistent thing to do.
I haven?t heard a single explanation for the rejection of the Google Voice app that makes a shred of sense at all."
http://stevenf.tumblr.com/post/152606616/important-note-references-to-i-in-this-post
If you want to find by far the biggest bullies in techdom by far, you need go no further than Apple.
That'd be like me saying that Stallman's somewhat aspergic personality traits should be ignored because Ballmer's such a moose. Doesn't work.
Yeah, I don't care about Apple or Microsoft.
I care about the Web and therefore Google is nore important because the Web is the biggest thing since sliced bread.
Why do some people think that anit-microsoft comments are only made by Apple shills.
Get over it. Lot's of people dislike Microsoft and probably aren't that impressed with Apple either.
Shut up, moron.
Me? I am fine with my Office 2003, and many still use the 2000, XP, or 97 version.
The public won't face hardship. Judging by the history of MS bullying others, I have no sympathy for MS.
Sorry to dissapoint you. I don't have an Apple Computer. There no better than Microsoft.
Poor, unloved, mis-guided Microsoft®; they won't own the whole !@#$%^&*() World anymore. And we can take the "Awarded-Damages" out of Mr. Bill's Charity Fund. No, I'm not angry; just another duped Vista® user.
Silver Lining - I've been looking to buy some MSFT.N ... at the right price.
- by gengaretjax September 19, 2009 6:37 PM PDT
- Generally, speaking the lawsuit was garnered by the smaller company l4i. Unawares as many of you are this has wide and long ramifications for all things web related. Nearly, all web services, applications, ajax (web2.0) websites utilize xml/xsl transformations for conversions. If Microsoft loses this battle with regards to their Office Application then we may very well see many other licensing issues with xml/xsl transformations. This would in turn make web2.0 problematic due to licensing issues. As a result every website currently utilizing this tech would then be required to 'update'.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(50 Comments)This is not about Microsoft, Apple or Open Source...this is more about who has the right to patent on technology that is fundamental to application open connectivity. Microsoft is actually pursuing the right action in this case and is seeking to protect open standards by way of appealing an unfair ruling.
The patent if upheld will impact all Mfr of software, services and website that utilize transormations...