On MovieTome: Lord of the Rings' lawsuit settled!
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By John Borland
Posted on ZDNet News: Jan 15, 2004 1:40:00 AM

A Chicago federal judge on Wednesday upheld a $521 million patent verdict against Microsoft that could ultimately force major changes in many of the most common Internet software products.

Judge James Zagel said he saw no reason to overturn an August jury verdict that said Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browsing software had infringed on patent rights held jointly by small developer Eolas Technologies and the University of California.

As part of his decision, Zagel barred Microsoft from distributing versions of its Web software that include the potentially infringing technology. However, he immediately put that injunction on hold until an appeal has run its course. Microsoft is expected to appeal immediately.

"This motion rehearses a set of arguments that failed the first time around," Zagel wrote in his opinion. "While I am not entirely comfortable with the large size of the judgment, it is not my comfort that matters."

The August ruling set off a mild panic in the Web developer community, which fears it may have to change the way that many basic Web page functions are created or triggered if Eolas is ultimately victorious in its suit.

The Eolas patent covers technology used to call up separate applications, such as a media player or document viewer, within a Web page.

Web programmers have spent much of the past several months scouring programming history to find what is called "prior art," or evidence that other people had invented the technology before Eolas, in order to try to invalidate the patent. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has opened a rare hearing to investigate the validity of the patent.

Microsoft has said that it believes that the Eolas patent will ultimately be found invalid, either by the courts or by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. It has already released versions of IE that try to sidestep some of the patent's claims, and has advised other Web developers to do the same.

"We remain confident that on appeal, when people hear this though, they will see that--as we claimed--the patent is not valid," Microsoft spokesman Lou Gellers said. "We don't think we violated anything even if it were valid."

Marty Lueck, an attorney for Eolas, applauded the ruling, in part because it would move the process to the appeals court more quickly.

"This forces the appeal process to begin and brings us another step closer to full resolution of case, which we would welcome," Lueck said. "Microsoft is a difficult opponent."

Eolas founder Michael Doyle said that the company would be happy to settle, but that Microsoft has not responded to Eolas' overtures.

The software giant has 30 days to file a notice of appeal in the case. As part of his ruling, Zagel said Microsoft must pay more than $45 million in "prejudgment interest" for the infringement while the appeal is mounted.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 87 Talkback(s)
Well IBM is the largest patent holder, so
don't develop anything without checking out the IBM big corporation patent portfolio, for the last decade plus. They learned quite a bit from their antitrust tussels, . . patents are the gifts you gi... (Read the rest)
Posted by: FilledOut Posted on: 01/17/04 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
bad...  ryusen | 01/14/04
Patents, copyrights take time  markgros@... | 01/14/04
1994  voska | 01/15/04
1994  d_jedi | 01/15/04
changed?  doh123 | 01/15/04
forced to get it ?  dodonfred | 01/16/04
assuming yo're right,  ryusen | 01/15/04
I agree  JWatson77 | 01/15/04
2 Years From When?  Digger_z | 01/15/04
Two years from the notice  AbsolutelyNot | 01/15/04
But I thought MS had a great respect for IP;-)  Richard Flude | 01/14/04
level playing field?  stephen732@... | 01/14/04
Um... puma?  rbethell | 01/15/04
Um... rbethell...  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Umm...John Le'Brecage...  billywill | 01/15/04
um... billywill  stephen732@... | 01/15/04
um... puma  billywill | 01/15/04
Uhmm, possible solution  Update victim | 01/15/04
Better Solution  middle of nowhere | 01/15/04
uhh..  d_jedi | 01/15/04
(NT) No, they are enforcing a government granted monopoly.  Update victim | 01/15/04
Not true  billywill | 01/15/04
what fair trade laws?  ryusen | 01/15/04
Antitrust? Are you daft?  WizWom_z | 01/15/04
(NT) Only that which they have assimilated.  Update victim | 01/15/04
open source  ryusen | 01/15/04
Total miscarriage of justice..  Mike Cox | 01/14/04
I agree!  GraysonPeddie | 01/14/04
Um, Grayson....  BitTwiddler | 01/15/04
SHssssss!  Nullifidian | 01/15/04
Even Microsoft is hinting that the patent was valid  AbsolutelyNot | 01/15/04
not necessarily  ryusen | 01/15/04
Mike Cox (a.k.a Iraqi Baghdad Bob?)  wploger | 01/15/04
No, No..Mike Cox IS Grayson  shawkins | 01/16/04
RE: Total miscarriage of justice  arpnet | 01/15/04
MS, stop whining.  NoB$ | 01/14/04
MS and Spyglass  richhayes | 01/15/04
maybe the patent office needs to be fined?  JWatson77 | 01/15/04
Minimal payments, reverse engineering  AbsolutelyNot | 01/15/04
spyglass  richhayes | 01/15/04
how?  ryusen | 01/15/04
Spyglass  richhayes | 01/15/04
Spyglass/Microsoft Settlement  Pebkac Charlie | 01/15/04
morality  ryusen | 01/15/04
question  JoeMama_z | 01/15/04
exactly  ryusen | 01/15/04
IP  lotta_anger | 01/15/04
Patents protect only major corps?  vferrara | 01/15/04
From what I understand ...  coffeenite | 01/15/04
Now that's a statement I can agree with  vferrara | 01/15/04
Apologies for my spelling  vferrara | 01/15/04
Lawyers fight to keep the money making problems  voska | 01/15/04
US IP is from the horse-and-buggy era  Frank MacCrory | 01/15/04
OLE2 should count as prior art  rbethell | 01/15/04
Message has been deleted.  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Message has been deleted.  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Two deletes?  AbsolutelyNot | 01/15/04
I giggle Diva, Sir  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
I asked  JWatson77 | 01/15/04
Meanwhile, Eolas negotiates with the OSS/Linux community.  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Well, Actually John  Don Bradley | 01/15/04
Well, Actually Don  George Mitchell | 01/15/04
Well, Actually George  Don Bradley | 01/15/04
One of us doesn't understand the Ebolas patent  George Mitchell | 01/15/04
one question.  ryusen | 01/15/04
Patent GPL?  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
You underestimate the laziness of the capitalist, and the developer, Don...  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Bug report: Software patents broken, fix pls  Nigel Johnstone | 01/15/04
That cuts both ways, and I like it.  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Spec vs. Implementation  WizWom_z | 01/15/04
You're correct!  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
True, but...  John L. Ries | 01/15/04
Nigel, I like it.  Update victim | 01/15/04
Actually, you DONT have to provide a working model  wolf_z | 01/15/04
S'truth, sir.(wtih modification)  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
ummm to all  ickusslime@... | 01/15/04
Brilliant!  KTLA | 01/15/04
Judge Ruling  alicia@... | 01/15/04
Because Alicia...  John Le'Brecage | 01/15/04
Guess the prior art was convincing enough  FilledOut | 01/15/04
Prior art priority  SublimeDaze | 01/15/04
Woops on the prior post  FilledOut | 01/15/04
Now, could MS settle with Eolas and still  FilledOut | 01/15/04
Microsoft Stuff probably ''is''prior art  ParadigmOdyssey | 01/15/04
This is stoopid  chromedome | 01/16/04
Kalahari  d.jarrell@... | 01/16/04
Well IBM is the largest patent holder, so  FilledOut | 01/17/04

What do you think?

advertisement

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
  • Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
  • Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More