http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10308013-75.html
a judge has issued a ruling that effectively tells microsoft 'Word to your mother'! (<--sorry, couldn't resist the pun).
seriously, how long does anyone think it's going to take microsoft to get this ruling overturned?
on a side note, i wonder what i4i plans on doing about open office, it also opens xml files and it's open source, do they really think they can stop them from supporting said files even with a court order?
Try StreamFab Downloader and download from Netflix, Amazon, Youtube! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread
-
-
Hmmm. Reading the claims of the patent (the stuff that counts), you could describe Apple's QuickTime file format that way. The claims lack detail, too, which makes the patent easy to get around.
John Miller -
you could describe Apple's QuickTime file format that way.
"...open an XML file containing custom XML."
"Custom XML refers to content within the file that is of a different XML format, with a separate "custom schema" to describe that content."
Solution:
"This injunction does not apply to any of the above actions wherein the Infringing and Future Word Products open an XML file as plain text."
Source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090812144154814
So, no, Quicktime is not in trouble. -
Not gonna happen. Word has something like 90% worldwide market share in word processors, Windows and Mac OS combined, its the de facto standard in business. The MS lawyers can tear this one down in five minutes: whatever a judge thinks of the merits, he or she would be an idiot to assume the global business market is simply going to stop using Word after betting the farm on it more than ten years ago. Seen any new WordPerfect or WordStar installations since 1996? Thought not.
-
@orsetto
Is there a legal argument in there? Reading through your ramblings I could not find a legal argument.
The judge in question does not have to give a flying fig what the business community does with Word. The question at hand is whether or not Microsoft is violating a patent held by i4i. The judge agreed:
"Defendant Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) is found to have unlawfully infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,787,449 (the “‘449 patent”)."
The judge also gave Microsoft an out:
"This injunction does not apply to any of the above actions wherein the Infringing and Future Word Products open an XML file as plain text."
So Microsoft can easily move around this.
Source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090812144154814 -
Originally Posted by orsetto
After 3 or 4 free uprades the upgrades stopped working, If I wanted a latest version of Word Perfect I would have to pay for a new version lol
To hell w/ them all anyway, I have Microsft Office Corporate Edition Blue Book 2007, but all I need is Wordpad, or my old Microsoft Office 2000 lol
Every new version of Word is bigger and more bloated than the last, and takes even longer to load, just to write a text document, who are these ppl that need the latest reiteration of Microsoft Word?
ocgw
peacei7 2700K @ 4.4Ghz 16GB DDR3 1600 Samsung Pro 840 128GB Seagate 2TB HDD EVGA GTX 650
https://forum.videohelp.com/topic368691.html -
@orsetto - RTL69 is correct and you are, no offense, a bit naive if you really think that's how it works.
A few years ago Blackberry lost a patent infringement case in the USA and the court ruling said that they had to stop infringing on the patent immediately. They had no workaround, so essentially that would have shut down Blackberry to comply. High ranking people in the US government freaked out and put pressure on the patent office. I thought for sure that within a short period of time the US Patent Office would miraculously find that the patent in question was invalid, but that didn't happen. The US government continued to intervene in the court case, begging the judge to not shutdown RIM (parent company of Blackberry), but to no avail. Finally a financial settlement was reached. Dude, if the US government couldn't save Blackberry's rear in a patent case, I can guarantee you that Microsoft does not have what it takes to "tear this one down in five minutes". -
On the other hand, what was that "settlement"?
I often hear of these cases where it was "settled out of court, the details not to be disclosed". For all anyone on the outside knows, the "settlement" was a bullet in the back of someone's skull.
I've been involved in several court cases where where the so-called "winning" party settled out of court just to save face. They only looked like the victor, with the status quo remaining the same. -
I expect Microsoft to release an Office update that removes Custom XML, similar to what they did with Java.
-
Originally Posted by RLT69John Miller
-
The patent's claims say nothing whatsoever about XML.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2F...9&RS=5,787,449
XML is an extension of SGML.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML#History
So I'm assuming that's where XML is coming into this. XML is mentioned in every article about this and in the Judge's.
But then Microsoft is trying to pull the same crap with this XML patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fneta...S=PN/7,571,169
Neither one should have been granted. -
No specific languages are mentioned in the claims and they are what count.
-
Originally Posted by RLT69
And BTW, my s/o happens to be a judge. You wanna talk "ramblings", try dating one for nine years. -
"Word" is not a Blackberry, there are no alternatives,There won't be some huge "opportunity" for OpenOffice or other competitors arising from this case
Again, you have not put forward any legal argument where Microsoft will win on appeal.
This is what the judge said:
"On the other hand, i4i will continue to be irreparably injured absent a stay. As discussed, the evidence shows that Microsoft's presence in the custom XML market has altered the very nature of the marketplace for smaller competitors such as i4i. The fact of Microsoft's infringement causes i4i to suffer irreparable harm for every new XML customer that purchases an infringing Microsoft product. To stay any injunction would only prolong that harm without providing any remedy.
...
Microsoft argues that redesigning current and upcoming WORD products is an enormous task. Microsoft suggests that compliance with i4i's proposed injunction would take approximately five months to re-release the currently infringing products. See Tostevin Decl., Docket No. 369-7.9 While there is also some disagreement over whether Microsoft has the capability to disable the infringing functionality with a mere "software patch," the Court will assume for the purposes of this analysis that complying with i4i's injunction poses a not insubstantial burden on Microsoft. Regardless, Microsoft has not presented any evidence on alternative methods for compensating i4i for its previous and ongoing loss of customers, market share, and brand recognition. While Microsoft concedes it has the ability to comply with an injunction encompassing i4i's proposed language, i4i will be continuingly injured without it. See Tivo v. EchoStar Commc'ns Corp., 446 F. Supp. 2d 664, 669 (E.D. Tex.2006) (Folsom, J.), rev'd on other grounds, 516 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (explaining that so called "sticky customers" continually shaped the market to patentee's disadvantage). Thus, the balance of hardships must favor the injured party.
With regard to the public interest, i4i does not request that Microsoft disable infringing WORD products that are sold prior to the effective date of any injunction. i4i also indicated at the hearing, that it would be amenable to Microsoft providing support to customers who purchased infringing WORD products before the effective date of its proposed injunction. Thus, i4i's proposed injunction would have little effect, if any, on the daily operations of Microsoft's current customers. In addition, where products do not relate to a significant compelling public interest, such as health or safety, this factor weighs in favor of an injunction. See Tivo, 446 F. Supp. 2d at 670 ("The public has an interest in maintaining a strong patent system. . . . The infringing products are not related to any issue of public health or any other equally key interest."). Custom XML does not relate to any of such key social interests. As a result, this factor also favors an injunction. Because all four eBay factors weigh in favor of injunctive relief, i4i's motion is granted...."
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090819083920659
It will be a tough uphill battle for Microsoft to win the appeal.
Good luck with that " Microsoft can do anything" strategy.
-
Originally Posted by orsettoJohn Miller
-
Originally Posted by JohnnyMalaria
Similar Threads
-
Microsoft Word question
By lordhutt in forum ComputerReplies: 5Last Post: 1st Jul 2010, 12:33 -
Microsoft Word
By didikai in forum Off topicReplies: 9Last Post: 11th Apr 2009, 22:40 -
customize numbers using microsoft word
By vipertongn in forum ComputerReplies: 0Last Post: 20th Jun 2008, 04:46 -
Microsoft Word experts!
By jyeh74 in forum Off topicReplies: 7Last Post: 16th Apr 2008, 15:02 -
Microsoft Office 2007 WORD software acting oddly
By bryankendall in forum ComputerReplies: 3Last Post: 27th Jan 2008, 14:58