Microsoft Sued Over Patent Infringements

Foobar of Borg writes "The Associated Press is reporting that Microsoft is being sued over alleged infringement of three patents held by Visto Corporation. The patents in question relate to the handling of information between servers and handheld telcom devices. Jack Evans, a Microsoft spokesman, has not commented on the case itself, but has simply stated that 'Microsoft stands behind its products and respects intellectual property rights.'"

Nnnnyes....

[Veneratio]

TFA: "Microsoft stands behind its products and respects intellectual property rights." Well they do, im sure. Right until they buy the company. "Heres , keep the change. All your IP are belong to us."

Patents

[pryonic]

I just don't get how this is meant to work. I don't blame Microsoft here, how are they to know an idea they comeup with has has already been patented? Or is this just the way modern business is going - money is made my sueing other people. I rarely stand behind MS, but i think this is all getting a bit silly now.

Too Many Patents

[Mattygfunk1]

The small guys try to get rich with patents suing the big guys, so the big guys get further patents to protect themselves.

The system is fucked.

__
Funny video clips for Adults only! [laughdaily.com]

Visto's press release

[tpgp]

From Visto's press release [visto.com]

"Microsoft has a long and well-documented history of acquiring the technology of others, branding it as their own, and entering new markets," said Mr. Bogosian. "In some cases, they buy that technology from its creator. In other cases, they wrongfully misappropriate the intellectual property that belongs to others, which has forced them to acknowledge and settle large IP cases with companies like Sun, AT&T and Burst.com. For their foray into mobile email and data access, Microsoft simply decided to misappropriate Visto's well known and documented patented technology."

Frankly, my take on it is that the more large comapnies that are sued over patents (especially submarine patents - although that doesn't seem to be the case here) the better.

Nothing like a little pressure from industry giants to speed up much needed reform of the patent system.

How things change...

[Noryungi]

I remember a time -- I think it was around the release of Windows 95 -- when the dream of every little startup was to get bought by Microsoft.

Now, they have strangled the competition so much that the dream of many little startups is to fold, hold onto their 'Intellectual Property' for a while, then sue the heck out of Microsoft.

Which, by the way, is not a bad strategy at all, since Bill Gates & Co. have billions and billions of dollars in the bank and are very willing to buy their way out of legal troubles (monopoly problems with DoJ and all that).

Re:Too Many Patents

[91degrees]

Except that doesn't always work. It's possible for a licencing company to have no products, but simply a portfolio of patents. As such, they can't be sued for patent infringement. Seems counterproductive for MS to lobby for patents since they are more likely to be sued than to sue.

Re:Patents

[lixee]

That's what results from patents being legal for software. You people should really try to reform the system there. Europe got the point and luckily refused the proposal to legalise software patents. More info on http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ [nosoftwarepatents.com]

what a bunch of sleazeballs

[penguin-collective]

Neither NTP nor Visto have contributed anything of importance to mobile E-mail technology; they have simply taken out patents on some of the obvious and trivial ways in which devices can get notified of server updates.

Visto's argument that it is good to beat Microsoft with patents because of Microsoft's monopolistic practices is wrong. It is true that Microsoft is behaving monopolistically with Exchange and Windows Mobile, but that's an issue for regulators and the market to worry about. Allowing Visto's and NTP's bogus patents to stand only replaces a big monopolist with a little one.

Respects intellectual propery rights?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember that this is the company that copied Stac Electronics' disk compression software, infringed on their patents, and lost the resulting lawsuit. The whole debacle ended up costing Microsoft hundreds of millions of dollars.

wild.

[CDPatten]

It seems the new craze for companies is that when they are struggling, just sue a successful company for patent infringement. Look at creative suing apple over the iPod... they didn't care until apple kicked their ass in the market. Look at RIM.

My point is that our corrupt politicians have allowed what should have been copyright law become patent law. Your code is a parallel to writing a book, not a parallel to creating the electric engine.

The irony is that big corporation like Microsoft have shot themselves in the foot here. They pushed for this type of patent law out of fear that their software would easily be duplicated, so It is funny to watch them get slapped by so many frivolous law suites.

Re:Patents

[back_pages]

You are oversimplifying. First, there can be patents filed but not yet issued -- you don't have access to them until the issue.

But of course, we all know that under AIPA all patent applications will be published within 18 months of filing, except in special circumstances where the inventors waive the right to claim priority in a foreign country to the US patent application. And of course, we all know that, because this is an extremely basic and well-known fact about patent systems around the world.

Second, doing a "real" patent search is an expensive proposition (I'm not talking about your boss doing a 2 minute google search on a few key phrases). No company can do that type of search on every little thing that comes along.

This is true, but any serious company can afford an accountant to handle their taxes. This keeps them out of trouble with the IRS. Any serious company can likewise afford to a) purchase litigation insurance, or b) invest some money into researching its IP liability with legal experts before taking a product to market. This keeps them out of trouble with the patent system. Pleading ignorance about patents is akin to pleading ignorance about taxes. Hire an expert or expect problems.

Re:what a bunch of sleazeballs

[sogoodsofarsowhat]

While you may consider it a bogus set of patents the good news your opinoin matters not. The patents have been issued and thus they have every legal right to defend them.

Re:Patents

[Shakes268]

Searching has been patented by the Lexus Nexus network. I'm sure your site license paid for the right to use the patented search technique, right?

In all seriousness now, for every section of code that I write during the day - if I were to spend an hour searching patents to make sure I don't infringe on something that just triples(or more) 99% of all software projects I've ever worked on.