On GameSpot: The Sith return to The Old Republic
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

Posted on ZDNet News: Feb 26, 2008 4:07:00 PM

Reuters Logo A federal court that hears patent appeals told a lower court on Tuesday to reconsider damages that Microsoft must pay a Guatemalan inventor for infringing his software in its popular Office Suite.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit tossed out the damages award of 12 cents per copy because the lower court failed to explain how it calculated the award.

At issue is a software program, which was patented by inventor Carlos Armando Amado, that links databases and spreadsheets. Amado sued Microsoft in 2003, alleging that several versions of Office Suite infringed his patent.

A jury ruled in favor of Amado and awarded him 4 cents per infringing unit. The case was appealed and then remanded to a district court, which tripled the damage award.

In the latest appeal, Microsoft asked for damages to be held at the jury award of 4 cents per copy of Microsoft's Office Suite sold with the infringing software. Amado asked for $2 per copy, an amount ordered held in escrow.

"Because the district court failed to adequately explain the basis for its award of $0.12 per infringing unit sold during the stay of the permanent injunction, however, and because recent Supreme Court action may affect post-verdict damages, we vacate in part and remand," the appeals court said.

The appeals court said it took no position on the proper amount of damages, saying that "logically" the award should "fall somewhere between" 4 cents and $2 per copy.

The new ruling also said that the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California "did not abuse its discretion" by dissolving its permanent injunction barring Microsoft from using the software.

Story Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

©2007 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. CNET , CNET.com , and the CNET logo are registered trademarks of CNET Networks, Inc. Used by permission.

Story Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 42 Talkback(s)
What about prior art
If you software preexists patents why would you pay? (Read the rest)
Posted by: cntlaltdel Posted on: 03/13/08 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Rare win  John L. Ries | 02/26/08
There seems to be a bit of dancing here by the Plantiff..  rtirman37@... | 02/27/08
This is not about what's fair...  Information_z | 02/28/08
Patenting software seems strange...  MikeZane | 02/27/08
how strange is it? btw, no mention in patent reform act  moskowitzs | 02/27/08
Cross Merck and see ...  knot_mine | 02/27/08
not quite..  STDog | 02/27/08
A fantasy  bmerc | 02/27/08
Truer words were never spoken!  Ole Man | 02/27/08
Neither is fair. Sheer lunacy to the whole mess  Cayble | 02/27/08
I agree.  Bruizer | 02/27/08
Can you?  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
Out to lunch  Cayble | 02/27/08
And perhaps that is why most IP law is  Mahegan | 02/27/08
Properly patenting software ...  lalogos | 02/27/08
rediculous patent laws  pcguy777 | 03/13/08
judges care too much about MS's wellbeing to rule fairly. they'll let M$  wessonjoe | 02/27/08
What about MSFT paying the fine to be held in excrow...  Confused by religion | 02/27/08
What about you?  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
You just validated Milly with even realizing it  GuidingLight | 02/28/08
RE: Patent court rules in Microsoft patent spat  agohige | 02/27/08
Bogus?  drobinow | 02/27/08
So...  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
A few engineers can write software and that's it  BALTHOR | 02/27/08
This ...  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
Has anyone heard it yet?  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
Linking files to DB's has been around since the dawn of time itselt  pcguy777 | 02/27/08
Patents  cntlaltdel | 02/27/08
Surely...  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
code  trm1945 | 02/27/08
Software patents is a defective idea. It goes against the purpose  hkommedal | 02/27/08
Is it?  scoobbs@... | 02/27/08
Remember thar most of the world do NOT recognize software patents.  hkommedal | 02/28/08
Not quite right  s_carter2000@... | 02/28/08
I don't like the idea of software patents  kedens | 02/27/08
I do like software patents if....  robert.w.michaelson@... | 02/28/08
How many patents?  cheesyone | 02/28/08
What is wrong with copyright. That is a lot more automatic and  hkommedal | 02/28/08
What is wrong with copyright. That is a lot more ...  TiggerTom | 02/28/08
What about prior art  cntlaltdel | 03/13/08
Patent process is need of review  Boot_Agnostic | 02/28/08
And politicians and Corporate bigwigs  Ole Man | 03/01/08

What do you think?

SmartPlanet

advertisement
Click Here