• The little guy wins: Microsoft Loses Supreme Court Ruling
    20 replies, posted
[release][h2]Microsoft Loses Supreme Court Case[/h2] The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a $290 million judgment against Microsoft for patent infringement. The award is the largest ever upheld on appeal in a patent case. A small software company called i4i sued Microsoft in 2007, alleging that the industry giant had, without permission, used an editing tool patented by i4i — specifically, that the program was used in Microsoft Word 2003 and 2007. A jury ruled against Microsoft, ordering it to pay $290 million to i4i and to stop using the patented editing tool. Microsoft appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. The company told the justices that i4i's patent was invalid and that the standard for proving invalidity should be less rigorous than the standard applied by the lower courts. But on Thursday, Microsoft lost in the Supreme Court by an 8-0 vote. Writing for the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said federal law clearly states patents granted by the U.S. Patent Office are presumed valid. She said the courts have long held that any challenger must prove invalidity by "clear and convincing" evidence, and not by the lower standard favored by Microsoft, "preponderance of the evidence." Any "recalibration of the standard of proof" must be done by Congress, said Sotomayor. All the remaining members of the court joined the opinion, except for Justice Clarence Thomas. He agreed with the outcome but got there via different reasoning. Chief Justice John Roberts did not participate in the case. According to financial disclosure reports, his family owns more than $100,000 in Microsoft stock. Microsoft no longer uses the i4i patented technology in its Word program. The company, which had a $5.2 billion profit in the first quarter this year, has not yet paid the damages which, with interest, are expected to rise above $300 million. The case has attracted enormous attention in the business community, with an astonishing 46 separate friend-of-the-court briefs filed. On one side were such big names as Google, Apple, Cisco and Intel — as well as financial services companies. They said it is often impossible to determine whether a software program is patented, since programmers can and do quickly build new programs based on existing knowledge. On the other side, supporting i4i, were biotech, pharmaceutical, new energy and venture capital firms, among others. They said investors would not spend the large amounts needed to create new technologies and products if a patent could be easily undermined. The Supreme Court's decision Thursday preserves the status quo — meaning there is a strong presumption of patent validity that is difficult to overcome in court. A contrary decision would have upended the way patent law has been practiced for decades and would have set off a mad scramble to rewrite the law in Congress. As it is, Microsoft issued a statement, saying it "would continue to advocate for changes to the law." [quote][url=http://www.npr.org/2011/06/09/137084487/microsoft-loses-supreme-court-case]NPR[/quote][/release] IP lawsuits should be done like this. When its the big guy vs the big guy, its just a shit flinging contest. Now we got the little guy vs microsoft. And the little guy is going to make it ahead.
Hopefully Microsoft will stop bitching now and actually pay They've been deemed to do loads of shit and never actually did it But hopefully they'll pay those guys atleast
Come on, Micro$oft, only $290 million? That's, like, pocket money for you!
Too bad the company that won is a patent troll.
Whats next?
[b]290[/b] MILLION ? Haha whoa, I guess it's the luckiest day for the i4i company.
nice to see we're still against big business
Little guy? More like patent troll. This is bad.
Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the name of the company is i4i? :v:
[quote][B]But on Thursday, Microsoft lost in the Supreme Court by an 8-0 vote. [/B] Writing for the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said federal law clearly states patents granted by the U.S. Patent Office are presumed valid.[/quote] Haha oh wow, even Scalia voted against Microsoft on this one.
-snip- i cant believe i just defended software patents i apologize profusely :suicide:
$290 million? brb starting patent troll company
Knowing software patent lawsuits, the plaintiff i4i probably is complaining that "Microsoft stole our idea for an Italicize button!"
[QUOTE=Zanfall;30354915]Too bad the company that won is a patent troll.[/QUOTE] That's the best part, the patent isn't specific enough.
[QUOTE=Swilly;30362081]That's the best part, the patent isn't specific enough.[/QUOTE] That is how most patent trolls work. Day by day they make countless obscure patents in the efforts to find one that is the most lucrative to work with against a big company. Most of us remember that Wiimote lawsuit between Nintendo and Anascape right? Shame the US is fucking retarded about patents.
Garry stole my idea for a website that ended in the word "punch." I have the patent right here.
i4i is an obvious patent troll company: The name for one: i4i = eye for an eye And for two, an obscure [b][i]SOFTWARE FUUUUU-----[/i][/b] patent. Should have been in MS's favor. They are atleast somewhat a respectable business compared to i4i.
I'm gonna sue Apple for stealing my idea of shitty software
[QUOTE=certified;30363247]i4i is an obvious patent troll company: The name for one: i4i = eye for an eye And for two, an obscure [b][i]SOFTWARE FUUUUU-----[/i][/b] patent. Should have been in MS's favor. They are atleast somewhat a respectable business compared to i4i.[/QUOTE] Thank you, because I didn't see the other 2 posts saying it's a patent troll company.
Damm, i gotta move to the US, start a company, patent a random item and sue a company that uses it and get rich.
Looks like it was an I 4 an I.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.