Judge orders Microsoft to stop selling Word
A judge has ruled that Microsoft cannot sell its flagship document processing application, Word, to customers, in a ruling stemming from a U.S. patent infringement lawsuit.
The decision rests on the program's ability to open .XML, .DOCX or .DOCM files, based on custom XML included in the filetypes. In the ruling, Judge Leonard Davis in the U.S. District Court in Eastern Texas -- where patent suits are often filed for favorable rulings -- sided with the plaintiff, i4i Inc., of Toronto, Ontario.
i4i has alleged that Microsoft violated a patent the company owns regarding the reading of XML files. Judge Davis's ruling, issued Tuesday, takes effect 60 days after the signing. Microsoft plans to appeal the decision.
The ruling applies to all versions of Word that can read XML. That includes Word 2003, Word 2007, and any future releases Microsoft may create that fall into the same category.
The ruling made no mention of Office 2008 for Mac or Word 2008 for Mac. Office 2010 for Windows is planned for release in the first half of next year.
"In accordance with the Court's contemporaneously issued memorandum opinion and order in this case," the ruling reads, "Microsoft Corporation is hereby permanently enjoined from the following actions with Microsoft Word 2003, Microsoft Word 2007, and Microsoft Word products not more than colorably different from Microsoft Word 2003 or Microsoft Word 2007 (collectively "Infringing and Future Word Products") during the term of U.S. Patent No. 5,787,449."
Earlier this year, i4i was awarded $200 million in damages in the same case by a jury. Microsoft has also appealed that decision.
On a separate -- but perhaps related -- note, Mac BU, Microsoft's Mac software development house responsible for Office for Mac (which includes Word), had previously scheduled a conference call with members of the press for Thursday afternoon. Prior to scheduling the event, Mac BU did not reveal what the announcement would be.
The decision rests on the program's ability to open .XML, .DOCX or .DOCM files, based on custom XML included in the filetypes. In the ruling, Judge Leonard Davis in the U.S. District Court in Eastern Texas -- where patent suits are often filed for favorable rulings -- sided with the plaintiff, i4i Inc., of Toronto, Ontario.
i4i has alleged that Microsoft violated a patent the company owns regarding the reading of XML files. Judge Davis's ruling, issued Tuesday, takes effect 60 days after the signing. Microsoft plans to appeal the decision.
The ruling applies to all versions of Word that can read XML. That includes Word 2003, Word 2007, and any future releases Microsoft may create that fall into the same category.
The ruling made no mention of Office 2008 for Mac or Word 2008 for Mac. Office 2010 for Windows is planned for release in the first half of next year.
"In accordance with the Court's contemporaneously issued memorandum opinion and order in this case," the ruling reads, "Microsoft Corporation is hereby permanently enjoined from the following actions with Microsoft Word 2003, Microsoft Word 2007, and Microsoft Word products not more than colorably different from Microsoft Word 2003 or Microsoft Word 2007 (collectively "Infringing and Future Word Products") during the term of U.S. Patent No. 5,787,449."
Earlier this year, i4i was awarded $200 million in damages in the same case by a jury. Microsoft has also appealed that decision.
On a separate -- but perhaps related -- note, Mac BU, Microsoft's Mac software development house responsible for Office for Mac (which includes Word), had previously scheduled a conference call with members of the press for Thursday afternoon. Prior to scheduling the event, Mac BU did not reveal what the announcement would be.
Comments
Something needs to be done about the BS lawsuits stemming from that legal toilet.
Microsoft grew by buying other companies, and giving away products to eliminate others it couldn't compete with their products. Just earlier this year, Microsoft lost its appeal to the EU trade minister and was ordered to pay over $800 million for anti-competitive practices.
Greed does not pay. I hope they will learn from this.
As Stephen Colbert might say:
Today's Word is - Non!
.
.
That might change things.
i4i appear to be a legitimate business with a product base since 93. Apparently i4i is using the patent, and appears they have MS internal emails confirming that MS knew about the patent.
The company also appears to be privately held which means it will be hard for M$ to buy them.
Seems like M$ got caught trying to steal the technology and now have to pay up.
M$ has 60 days to comply. Chances are, they'll find a way out of this before they have to remove product from the shelves.
According to Reuters, the verdict is $290 million. Copycat Microsoft is finally paying for no innovation of its own.
Microsoft grew by buying other companies, and giving away products to eliminate others it couldn't compete with their products. Just earlier this year, Microsoft lost its appeal to the EU trade minister and was ordered to pay over $800 million for anti-competitive practices.
Greed does not pay. I hope they will learn from this.
This is just a frivolous lawsuit. Apple gets hit with patent suits all the time.
BTW, Greed DOES pay actually, and handsomely. I too would like to believe it doesn't, and that we live in a fair world, but that's not the case.
According to Reuters, the verdict is $290 million. Copycat Microsoft is finally paying for no innovation of its own.
Microsoft grew by buying other companies, and giving away products to eliminate others it couldn't compete with their products. Just earlier this year, Microsoft lost its appeal to the EU trade minister and was ordered to pay over $800 million for anti-competitive practices.
Greed does not pay. I hope they will learn from this.
and this will affect Apple as well because the patent in question is a very broad and BS XML patent
According to Reuters, the verdict is $290 million. Copycat Microsoft is finally paying for no innovation of its own.
Microsoft grew by buying other companies, and giving away products to eliminate others it couldn't compete with their products. Just earlier this year, Microsoft lost its appeal to the EU trade minister and was ordered to pay over $800 million for anti-competitive practices.
Greed does not pay. I hope they will learn from this.
You may 'enjoy' this: Microsoft - A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalve...hoicepaper.pdf - NB pdf, I am not aware of a html version.
.
.
anyone else find the name i4i particularly funny for a plaintiff in a patent infringement case?
The jury found willful infringement, so presumably there is evidence Microsoft knew of the patent.
the bigger question is the nature of the patent. see the current tread is to drop patent protection for two particular situations
1. a company obtains and patent and does nothing with it in a practical sense but simply uses it to file lawsuits
2. the patent is on an idea and not on an actual method to implement ie if the patent is merely the idea to 'separate content and appearance into two separate but related sets of codes thus that one can be changed without affecting the other' then that could fall into the idea realm and be deemed too broad to be patent worthy.
which is a good thing because much of website design is still using CSS and XHTML (which is a 'dialect' of XML). so a win could shut down that as well.
something else to add is that XML is an open standard. so it is possible this whole thing will be tossed because i4i can't have patent protection over anything that uses XML cause they don't 'own' it
According to Reuters, the verdict is $290 million. Copycat Microsoft is finally paying for no innovation of its own.
Microsoft grew by buying other companies, and giving away products to eliminate others it couldn't compete with their products. Just earlier this year, Microsoft lost its appeal to the EU trade minister and was ordered to pay over $800 million for anti-competitive practices.
Greed does not pay. I hope they will learn from this.
Utter nonsense. Microsoft has definitely been guilty of vicious and greedy business practices, but *this* lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with that. This is the same sort of nonsense Lawsuit that we see pretty regularly filed on Apple. You need to be able to tell the difference between the two. Promoting these frivolous lawsuits against another company is the same as promoting them against Apple.
anyone else find the name i4i particularly funny for a plaintiff in a patent infringement case?
Microsoft should go 2th42th against these guys.
May I suggest:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...90812144154814
Indeed Groklaw in general for a better perspective on legal issues vis a vis software patents and the like.
I hate software patents. And this is precisely why. It is karmic that this happened to Microsoft, who just got an XML patent of its own on August 4th that could, presumably, be used against the entire market.
Microsoft are teh sux
.
It'll be appealed...
Something needs to be done about the BS lawsuits stemming from that legal toilet.
We should just give Texas back to Mexico. Too much baggage from that state.
The patent is quite well written and reasonable to read.