September 29, 2005 12:19 PM PDT
Microsoft loses in Eolas patent ruling
- Related Stories
-
Microsoft seeks rehearing in Eolas case
March 22, 2005 -
Appeals court revisits Eolas decision
March 2, 2005 -
Web patent critics spotlight old technology
October 31, 2003 -
Microsoft ordered to pay $521 million
August 11, 2003
In a decision made public Wednesday, the patent office upheld the validity of a patent held by the University of California and its Eolas Technologies spinoff. In 2003, a jury awarded more than $500 million in damages to the university and Eolas, but an appeals court this year partially upheld Microsoft's appeal, saying the company should be able to present evidence that similar inventions predated Eolas' patent application.
A University of California spokesman said Thursday that the patent office's ruling essentially says that the earlier work should not invalidate the Eolas patent.
"It is the second time that the patent office has thoroughly vetted the patent claim," UC spokesman Trey Davis said. "We're pleased that the ruling confirms our position all along."
Microsoft, meanwhile, expressed displeasure with the decision.
"This is very disappointing news, but we remain committed to seeing this case through to a successful resolution," a Microsoft representative said Thursday.
Eolas and the university filed suit against Microsoft in 1999, alleging that the way Microsoft's Internet Explorer uses plug-ins and applets infringes on an early-1990s patent.
25 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
Odds are that MS will once more just throw enough money on the
table to make the complaint go away. What;'s $500 million to MS?
I think this opens a big can of worms.
Bad news for customers: Eventually, they will pay more for Microsoft products.
Bad news for academic researchers: Increasingly often, they won't be allowed to publish their research or collaborate with other universities without permission from their IP department. Innovation will suffer.
Bad news for Apple/Safari, Mozilla/Firefox, Opera: They probably face similar fines, and not all of them can afford to pay.
Why can't american citizens simply get rid of their flawed software patent system, just like europeans did this summer ?
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/developer/0,39020387,39222696,00.htm" target="_newWindow">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/developer/0,39020387,39222696,00.htm</a>
I thought the earlier work should... I thought... What does this mean?! Can I now file a patent for something that someone else invented? And cross my fingers the patent office approves my application before they learn about the original? Oh... even if they do anyway, I am protected because the patent office will not shame itself to admit they're wrong.
Is this the patent office trying to save its credibility despite an obvious mistake?
I also feel that assuming that only one person can come up with the same original idea is not plausible (With Earths population of over 5 Billion) . There have been many instances where teams in two countries have been working on the same thing, come up with the similar solutions without any knowledge of the other.
I mean, you only have to look at how people have recently patented things like bra cup sizes, swinging on a swing set, etc to see how ridiculous it has gotten.
Note to c|net: the placement of the "Reply to Story" and "Reply to Message" links need to be rethought.
whatever reason, and MS essentially violated the owner patent
rights. Sure, the Patent Department is an illogical mess, allowing
patents on many non-patentable items - like genes. But that's
another war to fight.
So until the Eolas patent gets thrown out, which seems to be the
proper thing to do, MS is in violation and does face penalties.
The overall uncertainty is why. I commented:
"....... maybe and maybe not........"
And in the meantime, MS is likely to try to buy their way out of
the very negative impact on Internet Explorer.
There is also another experimental browser to view MPG movies across a network that predates EOLAS was actually a functional application. Only thing that killed it was limited BPS that made inpraticle to employ at the time.
patent itself, you will begin to realize how vague it is in relativity
to a very diverse industry.
Those of you who know me, or have read my posts, will
recognize I have no love of Microsofts business practices and
over-line behaviour. However, it simply does not apply here.
A lot of fancy words, and dressing things up does not change
the fact that this is SIMPLY another description of binary code
referencing binary code, and data over a network.
Gee. That has been around in a myriad of forms before many of
you were even born. Patent my ass.