MS Dubs Word Injunction "Miscarriage of Justice"

[JMcEntegart]

Microsoft Wednesday appealed a judge's decision to impose an injunction on the sale of Word in the United States.

MS Dubs Word Injunction "Miscarriage of Justice" : Read more

 

[puddleglum]

Wouldn't be such a big deal if everyone weren't dependent on a product from one vendor.

 

[falconqc]

I wonder, why is i4i not suing the creators of Open Office? As I recall, Open Office has XML support and the ability to read/write .docx files.

 

[Guest]

There used to be quality control for issuing patents 100 years ago. Now they give one to anybody who's willing to pay.

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]puddleglum[/nom]Wouldn't be such a big deal if everyone weren't dependent on a product from one vendor.[/citation]
You can use the crap know as OpenOffice

 

[geoffs]

[citation][nom]falconqc[/nom]I wonder, why is i4i not suing the creators of Open Office? As I recall, Open Office has XML support and the ability to read/write .docx files.[/citation]Maybe because there is no money to be made from doing so? Go ahead, get an injunction forcing them to stop giving away Open Office for free. If they prevail over MS, and if OO infringes the same patents, then the probably will sue, but in IP suits, you always pick one of two groups for your initial suit(s):

1. Go after someone with money and a lot to lose. Pro, big potential settlement, chance that they will simply pay a license fee rather than risk a court battle. Con, they've got a lot to lose, they're likely to fight if they think the licensing fee will cost more than the court battle.

2. Go after a small company who can't afford a big court battle and is likely to sign a license agreement. Pro, getting someone to license your patent implies the patent is valid, and may provide some additional working cash. If the alleged infringer fights you in court and loses, you have precedent indicating the patent is enforceable. Con, there isn't much chance of getting much money. The only reasons to pursue this first is to strengthen the apparent validity of a patent. That may help lower costs and/or speed up later cases against larger infringers.

 

[Hanin33]

this is only an injustice for microsoft in that they're finally be held as an infringer and are unable to pay their way out... if it were them on the other side they would do everything possible to sink the opposing company...

in this case, we've heard evidence that microsoft knew in advance of this 'patent' and tried to sneak around it. case closed, pay up or stop making your infringing product.

 

[hemelskonijn]

falconqc :
I wonder, why is i4i not suing the creators of Open Office? As I recall, Open Office has XML support and the ability to read/write .docx files.

Because microsoft was interested in the past in buying a license and chose to go rouge.According to i4i the patent has no hold on the implementation used in OOo but might possible be violated by lotus however they stated that they see no point in hunting them down.

This is a healthy attitude since the reason for suing microsoft is based on both using patented stuff and because microsoft pulled back out of a deal to be able to use it years ago. (twice the screw)

 

[Major7up]

[citation][nom]falconqc[/nom]I wonder, why is i4i not suing the creators of Open Office? As I recall, Open Office has XML support and the ability to read/write .docx files.[/citation]
They won't get much from such an action seeing how Open Office is not sold.

 

[agentjon]

I hope they get this resolved soon. I need Word for 20 new employees.

 

[Yoder54]

There is always WordPerfect.

Funny how MS almost drove WP into extinction, and now they will be the first to profit from MS's dubious business practices.

 

[E7130]

[citation][nom]Hanin33[/nom]this is only an injustice for microsoft in that they're finally be held as an infringer and are unable to pay their way out... if it were them on the other side they would do everything possible to sink the opposing company...in this case, we've heard evidence that microsoft knew in advance of this 'patent' and tried to sneak around it. case closed, pay up or stop making your infringing product.[/citation]

I've read their patent, its very vague and doesn't resemble the method in which is used in docx. It shouldn't have even been made a patent.

If your going to challenge a giant with patent infringement, better make sure your shit makes since and isn't just a bunch of flow charts and actually describe a unique technology that you can produce. I think MS stomp the shit out of them and bankrupt their company.

 

[jhansonxi]

Microsoft was penalized with an injunction - they EARNED an injunction just like their lawyers earned a nice fine as well. If it wasn't for an internal email that showed their intent to make i4i's obsolete after meeting with them, the injunction wouldn't have occurred. WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT on this scale has its rewards.

 

[Guest]

Easiest way to get the judges and the rest of the government to recognize their error would be to comply with the judgement and to issue an update disabling all copies of MS Word.

All Documents which are in said formats and which require MS word to read or edit will be unavailable to most parties and it would be too costly to update all the affected systems with compatible programs which users would be comfortable using.

This would force them to re-examine the issue, how patents are issued and the abuse of the patent system.

With a little bit of luck, the patent system would go back to the way it used to be which is to say, you could NOT be vague about the design of an object or system. You would have to be precise in your designs.

 

[megamanx00]

[citation][nom]falconqc[/nom]I wonder, why is i4i not suing the creators of Open Office? As I recall, Open Office has XML support and the ability to read/write .docx files.[/citation]

Well the ability to read and write docx files is based on a plugin so that could be easily removed. Even so ODF is very similar in nature and technically they would be able to use the same patent to sue Sun and supporters of the ODF format. Since it's open source the offending XML support would simply be removed by programmers who need to get work done and it would be removed quickly. Also there are numerous groups who support the standard and whom collectively hold a large number of patents and might be inclined to litigate i4i into oblivion. From there you get the EFF involved and every effort will be made to invalidate the i4i patent. If that happens i4i will be sued for suing people in the first place.

Yeah it wouldn't go to well.

 

[freiheitner]

I'm afraid that if the patent is valid, then the law was carried out. Microsoft's real complaint would seem to be that they don't have a patent suit they can slap back with.

 

[ahnilated]

You guys really need to read the patent and what i4i said. They said that ODF does NOT infringe on their patent. MS will fully infringed on their patent and tried to bury them. I think what the judge did is correct and MS has a history of doing this type of stuff.

 

[manjyomethunder]

Another company trying to make a quick buck with a bullshit patent and a lawsuit.

 

[Guest]

There's a nice article here
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090812144154814
So yes patents suck, but it's "legitimate" with an actual product to back it up. And Open offices ODF isn't at risk due to a lack of 'custom' XML.
I guess there Word interpreter could be, but it's probably not a big deal.

 

[pullmyfinger123]

Using the phrase "miscarriage of justice", Microsoft implied there was some kind of abortion (natural or artificial) performed on mama-justice. So Microsoft not only just irked anti-trust officials, it just pissed off the Pope. Good luck Microsoft, you just made another powerful enemy.

 

[jecht]

[citation][nom]jhansonxi[/nom]Microsoft was penalized with an injunction - they EARNED an injunction just like their lawyers earned a nice fine as well. If it wasn't for an internal email that showed their intent to make i4i's obsolete after meeting with them, the injunction wouldn't have occurred. WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT on this scale has its rewards.[/citation]

I agree. If it hadn't been willful infringement on Microsoft's part, I think Microsoft would have been fully within their rights in this case. A vague patent, with no real products implementing it, should not be valid in pursuing lawsuits against "infringing" companies years after the fact. However, in this case, with proof of willful infringement, I have to side with i4i.

It's been said many times before, but the US seriously needs to rework its patent system. I'm sick of hearing of cases like this.

 

[anamaniac]

[citation][nom]Hanin33[/nom]this is only an injustice for microsoft in that they're finally be held as an infringer and are unable to pay their way out... if it were them on the other side they would do everything possible to sink the opposing company...in this case, we've heard evidence that microsoft knew in advance of this 'patent' and tried to sneak around it. case closed, pay up or stop making your infringing product.[/citation]

William Shakespeare used to steal the works of other writers constantly, but his specialty wasn't originality, but making something else better.
Microsoft is the same. The steal it, and then make it better, to sell it off as their own.

Shakespeare is considered a great man for what he did. Microsoft is seen as a horrid enemy... they do the exact same thing.
What's the difference?

Microsoft may be thieves, but that doesn't change the fact that they have helped improve technology as we know it for the better of mankind.

 

[Mayosoft]

It's not XML portion they are sueing MS for. It is the XML template generator portion. Of which 95% of Word users do not use. Strip from Word, stop selling MS products in Canada and let them see what it could be like.

My thought is; Why did they wait 6+ years to sue MS, they could have nipped it in a bud back in 2002 before Word 20003 was announced. And that the judge is totally out of his element in this case, it should have been a Federal case, or a place where there are more Word users reside, like NYC or Calif. Hmmm Tyler, Texas sounds like a buddy-buddy, okie-dokie deal to me.

Now here's the cavaet that the judge may have not considered. All the template items generated in Word, by the USGOV, and large corporations may or will be trapped and have to be recreated using Jo-Jo and Pookie's XML Conversion tool. Think about that fiasco! Along with the integrity and security of the data, like you SSAN or Credit Card numbers in a whole new set of 'outsourced' workers. hmmmm again

 

[Mayosoft]

[citation][nom]Yoder54[/nom]There is always WordPerfect. Funny how MS almost drove WP into extinction, and now they will be the first to profit from MS's dubious business practices.[/citation]

I would use MS Works before going to WordPerfect! WP failed because it was not advancing to the needs of the market. It primarily geared itself toward legal aspects of word processing i.e. Court and litigation papers. I remember converting thousands of briefs to DOC format.

And today WP still does not fit the bill, MS Office has automation features that blows WP out of the water. So pulling addresses from Excel, Access, Exchange/Outlook are a breeze. Then there is no VBA in WP either so with no macro generation and programmable tools would effectively lower the intelligence of the average office worker. It would be like stepping back to 1996.

What we may see is a stripped down of Word without the XML template generator (of which I never used or needed). But to halt Word sales altogether itself is like using a chainsaw to do the job of a scalpel.

 

[p05esto]

I'm sick of companies Suing Microsoft... Greed is destroying the #1 computer company and bringing the greatest innovator of the personal computer to its knees. Where would we be with Microsoft? A bunch of fragmented, weakly support systems and software - a BIG mess. The other OS and office options basically suck, let's face it. And let's not forget MSSQL and VS, along with everything else MS does (Xbox).

We need more legal support for these larger companies to keep them from collapsing. Look at our banks, their sheer size made them targets for abuse and fraud by others looking to profit. Everyone is looking to Sue for every little thing, GREED!!!