MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

This result seems patently absurd.

Ouch!!!!!

Aug 12, 09 - 09:36 am Comment from: theloniousMac

Patent system is OUT OF FRICKING CONTROL. I guarantee no one at Microsoft ever heard of ic4 or whatever their name is. This is, as usual, ridiculous.

Aug 12, 09 - 09:37 am Comment from: Mr. Reeee

WOW! Couldn't happen to a nicer company!

Karma can be a bitch!

Karma's a bitch!

Wow! Maybe they should change the name to eye4eye.

Wow. Our collective hatred of the flawed patent system is so great that we're actually supporting Microsoft. Impressive.

Aug 12, 09 - 09:42 am Comment from: Mr. Reeee

@Marc G
ROFLMMFAO!!!!!!

Aug 12, 09 - 09:42 am Comment from: Road Warrior

I thought this was a joke but it is not.

http://sev.prnewswire.com/banking-financial-services/20090811/DA6039911082009-1.html

Wow, Microsoft can't sell Turd anymore, and since that is so closely tied into Oriffice I guess they won't be able to sell that too (although I would not be surprised that they won't try to work around this).

And jurors found out that MS did this willfully, absolutely fantastic. MS must have known about the patent.

I think I will have a party this weekend to celebrate this fantastic news.

Aug 12, 09 - 09:49 am Comment from: Connor MacBook

Relax, it's for the greater good!

Aug 12, 09 - 09:50 am Comment from: DogGone

With the size of the penalty I would say this is no trivial lawsuit. i4i appear to be a legitimate business with a product base since 93. The company appears to be privately held which means it will be hard for M$ to buy them!

Seems like M$ got caught trying to steal the technology and now have to pay up. Someone just won the lottery.

Aug 12, 09 - 09:51 am Comment from: REALTORben

The only thing I would say is that if this was against Apple, MDN would of course say "Patent infringement is wrong..." but they would mention that the lawsuit takes place in a scum-sucking part of the country where companies buy patents with no intent on ever using them, instead, they hope some other company has the same great idea. Then they hope that company develops it into a good and marketable product. Once that's done, they wait for the product to become very very profitable for a company. Once that point is reached, they swoop in and try and get some profits. Of course since it's against MS, MDN wont' say that. But it is still the case. I wish Patent Laws could be changed so that people have to at least be working on the patent. If not working on the patent, they should at least have only a small window of opportunity to claim infringement, otherwise it should dissolve. Similar to Trade Marks. If Apple doesn't defend its trademark within a specified time frame of an infringement, then they lose the trademark. So should it be with Patents.

without patents there would be a disincentive to actually innovate...

obviously.

but then again, who the hell are ICI?

Aug 12, 09 - 09:54 am Comment from: hagar57

Oops, cannot Pages open .docx, too? Open Office can handle these file types, as can Bean, Mellel and most other word processors. Are they in trouble, too?
BTW, isn't this the instant patent infringement court where each and every con artist can make successful claims?

Aug 12, 09 - 09:58 am Comment from: shen

ok look, i wish MS would implode in upon themselves in a fiery death as much as anyone, but i call bullshit.

at some point we really need to make the US patent system not the biggest joke in the universe...

Aug 12, 09 - 09:58 am Comment from: DogGone

@ Thelonius

This may be one example of where the Patent system is protecting invention. It appears that the company developed the innovation and according to their website has products based on it.

M$ must have taken the idea and adapted it for their own use which is clearly wrong.

There are many things wrong with the patent system part of which is broad claims being made which are never implemented. I don't think this is the case here.

Aug 12, 09 - 09:59 am Comment from: s

If MS is infringing on this patent to read Word .XML files, wouldn't other word processors capable of reading such files also be affected (e.g., Page)?

This doesn't mean that Microsoft must recall and destroy all versions of Word already in use.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:00 am Comment from: Original Jake

I bet the injunction will be stayed during the (lengthy) appeals process. Alternatively, M$ could simply purchase a license from this company (if it's not too exhorbitant).

It seems to me that it would only impact the other companies if they did not pay something to i4i to use this functionality. I am not an expert by any stretch, but that would seem logical. On the other hand, MS does have the largest customer base for its' office products. I use it sparingly myself along with Pages 08, and whatever the latest version of Mellel (proud user since version 1.0) is because it is easiest for working with Hebrew language, and it is quickly catching up to Word in terms of funtionality.

if they cant sell it, maybe they can give it away FREEBIES

Aug 12, 09 - 10:12 am Comment from: Ottawa Mark

M$ has 60 days to comply. I'm sure they'll wriggle out of this before having to remove anything from store shelves...

I can't really comment on whether it's BS, because I don't know the details. If, for instance, i4i offered them a license to the patent, and MS ignored them and just infringed, or worse, they offered the patent, MS ADDED it to word without buying a license, then they deserve what they get.

As for other products that open these documents, they may or may not be in trouble as well. They may be required to get a license....or they may already have.

However, I can only assume that if M$ didn't settle beforehand (buy a license and pay back penalties). they must have thought they were in the right or were being bamboozled by one of those patent whores (yes, they are out there).

M$ will appeal and then settle.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:14 am Comment from: qka

I too thought this was a joke when I saw the headline.

I went so far as to double check my calendar, making sure this wasn't the first of April.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:15 am Comment from: jtc

@hagar57

OpenOffice is freeware.. word is not. OpenOffice will be safe

So, then cascading style sheets (CSS) used by everyone and every browser also infringe?

Oh, no ,wait, those were developed in the early 90's. Ooops, prior art. Patent invalid.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:15 am Comment from: Jubei

Got iWork. Got NeoOffice. Optionally you can get Open Office. All you need.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:16 am Comment from: Regular Reader

Zune Tang?

No love here for MS, but I agree with theloniousMac ... it sounds like something that should not be patentable in the first place. So many patents seem to be obvious variations of existing methods or standards, and that's what this sounds like -- and anything obvious shouldn't be patentable.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:20 am Comment from: qka

Maybe Judge Leonard Davis is a frustrated Windows user.

M$ will appeal for years and years.

Is it possible to buy stock in McKool Smith and Tyler?

Aug 12, 09 - 10:34 am Comment from: Andy

I have to say -- this is utterly ridiculous; law firms taking it upon themselves to decide what everyone can buy? As garbage as Microsoft's products are, the market dictates if Word et al will sink or swim.

The patent system is one of the worst scams out there -- heck, why bother making good products and coming up with ideas when you can simply sue your competitor to death?

As I've said before, here, be careful what you wish for. Because one day the patent 'infringement' vampire will be after Apple's blood too -- which ultimately means less innovation and higher prices.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:35 am Comment from: almux

It is just funny because it happens to Monstrosoft... Yet, this damn patent thing can really be dangerous for any other.
And still, the artists aren't protected enough...

Apparently i4i is using the patent and they have MS internal emails confirming that MS knew about the i4i patent.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:36 am Comment from: Zune Tang®

It's a sad day when the MAC cultists sway activist judges and illegally interfere with juries to push their proprietary overpriced toy computer agenda. There must be a MAC store in the Eastern District of Texas where MAC fangirls are getting unsuspecting Texans to drink the Kool-Aid.

You can have my Word when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. And don't mess with Texas.

Your potential. Our passion.™

Aug 12, 09 - 10:40 am Comment from: GregoriusM

Patent law is in disarray as far as I am concerned but a goodly portion of the comments on these forums complain about patent holders with no products. This company has products with the technology integral to its use. That alone puts this law suit in a different category.

@jtc

Just because something is free does not exempt it from copyright infringement lawsuits. It still technically removes revenue from the copyright holder. They could still be liable.

Aug 12, 09 - 10:45 am Comment from: Mac Daddy

I would be very happy to hear this, except that the case was held in Eastern Texas, which is basically a bullshit mill.

This'll be appealed and overturned. No doubt about it.

Well, the I4I does look like a legitimate company, but there are a few interesting twists. The XML format was first started as an open source format (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/) with many revisions since the first format was formally announced in 1996, with the first edition published 10 February 1998. I4I filed their patent application 2 June 1994, and, it appears, they were not a part of the XML working group (Microsoft was). So, maybe the entire Open Source-ness of XML comes into question???

Aug 12, 09 - 11:03 am Comment from: madgunde

@Zune Tang
You're slipping man. C'mon, we know you can do better!

Aug 12, 09 - 11:04 am Comment from: alansky

The problem with cheering for this development, obviously, is that Apple is unfairly attacked quite regularly in exactly the same way. Perhaps Microsoft is guilty. Then again, maybe they're not. The point is that it does Apple no good at all to support the efforts of no-name companies that come out of the woodwork to sue big companies for supposed "patent infringement in podunk courthouses in east Texas.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:07 am Comment from: MacTony

I always like to hear the discontent with patents. If you don't have and enforce patents, you don't have products. Because there's always a company out there with plenty of cash that can take your idea and make a lot money....... cough....... Microsoft.

By the way, I know ZuneTangless just likes to do this to jerk people's chain. But, it's not spelled MAC (Media Access Control). It's spelled Mac.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:11 am Comment from: Hm...

After reading the patent, I'm amazed that it was granted. The idea of mapping style codes rather than embedding them is such an obvious 'next step' from the .rtf specification that the Primary Examiner, one Almis R. Jankus, must have done the entire analysis while asleep. Awarding this patent is patently ridiculous.

M$ may well be guilty of using the technique and knowingly infringing. As much as I enjoy M$ going down, if this case holds on appeal, then every other company's word processor that can interpret .docx and xml schemas is at risk. Not only that, but Powerpoint, Keynote, et al, may also be the next targets.

That does it... The Time Machine that I've successfully invented and tested? I'm boxing it up and putting it in the garage... I was going to make a formal announcement next week and start selling rides in it, but jeez, as soon as I get it going, I'm sure someone will sue me for some sort of minor, and vague patent infringement, so why bother even releasing it to the public, it'll just be a headache of lawyers and courts down the road. Sorry everybody.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:13 am Comment from: TheConfuzed1

There needs to be a statute of limitations on the time between patent, proof of concept, and final product.

No one has ever even heard of this company, and I doubt they've ever even acted on this patent, with the exception of litigation.

No one should be able to sit on a patent, waiting for someone else to release an actual product with similar functions, and then sue to get rich.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:16 am Comment from: The Other Steve

Dosn't Apple also sells a word processor that reads and writes the same format? Are they next or did Apple innovate their way around this?

"theloniousMac
Patent system is OUT OF FRICKING CONTROL. I guarantee no one at Microsoft ever heard of ic4 or whatever their name is. This is, as usual, ridiculous."

You're out of control. You don't know the facts of the case and should refrain from such judgements.

The jury found that MS did have knowledge of the patent.

Then again, a jury found O.J. not guilty....

Liberty is dead. WGAS

Aug 12, 09 - 11:23 am Comment from: TheConfuzed1

Okay, I've read the rest of the comments now, and not only do they have products based on this patent, but MS knew about it.

If true, that changes things.

This will be interesting.

MS was found of willfully infringing on the patent, so the jury must have been schooled in programing and coding to make any sense of any of this rediculous patent. I think not. Im not so sure its the patent process that is broken, but rather the legal system. Im sure grandma Jones on jury thought "MS is company with lots of money and Im this will teach them. Guilty!!"
MS one day, Apple the next, Google after that.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:30 am Comment from: Gordon Horne

The jury found willful infringement, so presumably there is evidence Microsoft knew of the patent. The patent itself seems shaky. Given the dates involved, prior art is confused. This might be the prior art. But the software techniques described really seem to fall into the too obvious to patent group.

Word for Mac should be unaffected, though. Didn't i read that it couldn't open the file formats in question.

Aug 12, 09 - 11:55 am Comment from: Road Warrior

Hey Zune Hole "It's a sad day when the MAC cultists sway activist judges and illegally interfere with juries to push their proprietary overpriced toy computer agenda."

This has nothing to do with Apple, they were not involved. What a Zunhole.

Insofar as prying, heck keep Word. You can relax, no one will be interested in your Zune either. We all know where you keep that.