Microsoft Being Sued Again

[Peter]

Microsoft (as well as adobe) are being sued by a company called Aloft Media:-

A Texas-based company has filed a suit against Microsoft and Adobe for allegedly infringing on two patents for technologies that display content in a Web browser in key software products, including Microsoft's Windows Vista.


Aloft Media holds patents for two technologies called "Network Browser Graphical User Interface for Managing Web Content" and "Network Browser Window with Adjacent Identifier Selector," U.S. Patents 7,117,443 and 7,194,691, respectively. Both patents are for technologies related to the GUI that displays URLs in a Web browser.

In its court filing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Aloft alleges that Microsoft infringes upon both patents in Internet Explorer 7 and Windows Vista and Adobe infringes on them in Acrobat Standard, Acrobat Professional, and Acrobat 3D. Aloft is a little-known startup that develops digital media.

According to the U.S. Patent and Trade Office, Aloft filed both patents in October 2003. The '443 patent was granted on Oct. 3, 2006, and the '691 patent was granted March 20, 2007.

Aloft is seeking a jury trial and wants an injunction granted against the companies, damages, and attorney fees from the court.

Adobe said through its public relations firm that it does not comment on pending litigation. Microsoft said through its public relations firm that it has not yet been served and so has no comment.

http://www.infoworld.com/archives/e...atent-suit-against-Microsoft-and-Adobe_1.html


Looking at the dates these patents were sought I somewhat doubt this will be a successful lawsuit.

 

[iulianh]

Nice, i hope that company wins buy i doubt, i hate Microsoft !

 

[Barrucadu]

Nice, i hope that company wins buy i doubt, i hate Microsoft !

Why? Do you have a specific reason? Or is it just because many other people do, and you like excuses like "It crashes more than linux"?

 

[iulianh]

Sincerily i really hate microsoft and i am not using Windows, use too , it`s nice but my system always crashed and i always had viruses and i hat good antivirus .

 

[Peter]

that is not exactly a good enough reason to hope that Microsoft lose this case.

The patents seem absolutely baseless. They have basically patented things that were already in use for a long time before they filed.

I know for a fact I have been using a web browser pre 2006 (or 2003 when they claim it was invented) when 7,117,443 was filed yet they seem to have patented this exact technology. Maybe I should go patent engines and sue every car manufacturer.

Just a note the following 2 links are the links to information regarding each patent:-

7,117,443
7,194,691

 

[Mike]

I'm certain that the USPTO executes their searches regarding existing patents & comparative patents vs. patent applications very thoroughly. I'm also relatively certain that patents are not just "handed out" when someone files the paperwork, thus the time from an actual submission to the patent being established. it takes quite some time and quite some money. I'm not sure how liable the USPTO is when issuing a patent on a product that's already existing.
In any case, the company that owns these 2 patents must be on to something and have a reasonable chance in pursuing 2 of the most influential and financially strong companies on this planet. I think that dismissing this suit may be a bit too early, no one in their right mind would sue MS and Adobe without substantial reason, because even for a "cloaked" advertising campaign, the money invested in a lawsuit of this proportion would outweigh the benefits of a rogue campaign.

:imho:

IB

 

[Peter]

providing I am understanding the patent page properly patent number 7,117,443 was applied for in 2003 (October 22, 2003) and was granted in 2006 so even if you take the date it was applied for browsers were already in existence.

The following is the description of the patent

A network browser graphical user interface is provided for use in association with a network browser. Included is a network browser window associated with a network browser for displaying content associated with uniform resource locators (URLs) during network browsing. Also displayed is a plurality of identifiers adjacent to or separate from the window in which the content is displayed. In use, a user is allowed to pre-select at least one of the identifiers. Moreover, after the pre-selection, content associated with at least one URL displayed during use of the network browser is correlated with the pre-selected identifier.

Now I personally think that is just describing what internet explorer, firefox, opera, aol, safari etc etc do and have done for years.

 

[Mike]

Now I personally think that is just describing what internet explorer, firefox, opera, aol, safari etc etc do and have done for years.

I totally agree with you. However, basing a lawsuit on this alone would most likely get them laughed out of court and/or be a nice trial slam dunk for a High School Freshman. There's gotta be something else or more to it, something that doesn't meet the eye straight on, 'cause this, as it stands would be sheer lunacy to use for a suit.

IB

 

[Jeffrey]

Why don't some companies just notify the suspected copyright violators first, if the suspected violators refuse to budge then that's the time sue the former.

By the way, Microsoft haters are getting boring already! :yell:

 

[nuDy]

I don't think Microsoft and Adobe will use somebody else's method that displays URLs in a Web browser or something. Moreover, I don't think that if it is stolen, it will be proven easily. Those huge companies won't make such an amateur frauds!

 

[labrocca]

Proving once again that Patents for IP are getting more and more ridiculous from the patent office. These internet patents are for the most party pure crap. Reminds me of Amazon's patent for one-click checkouts. Insanity!

 

[Ronald Regging]

I don't think they are claiming that they hold the patent to web browsers. I think the real issue lies in the last part where it talks about "pre-selected identifiers." To be honest, I have no clue WTH they're talking about... But it almost sounds like they are saying there is a way to pre-select an indentifier (whatever that may be), and then all URLs that are visited will show content based on this pre-selected identifier. It seems more like they have a patent on a very specific web browser "feature" that hadn't existed previously. If this is the case, and MS and Adobe implemented this same feature after it was patented, then this company has a very real case.

As I said, I really have no idea what they're patent even means, but thats the only plausible assumption I could make. Its just impossible to jump to conclusions on Patent lawsuits, because the patent laws are so convoluted and you need to be of a special ilk to invest the time to even understand what the hell the patent is saying. I am not of this kind

 

[rhys]

When you are running around with a big bag of money like MS is, you get sued by everybody for everything. Most of the time, it is baseless, but it doesn't mean that MS won't just pay you to go away. It's so pathetic it almost makes me want to be a republican (but then I look at some actual republicans and that cures me).

I don't know what the patent office is doing. They seem to hand out the most ridiculous patents that had no business getting filed in the first place. Nintendo got a patent on "normal mode" in video games. Thats right, a patent on characters in a video game acting normal.

 

[PowerUp]

Nintendo got a patent on "normal mode" in video games. Thats right, a patent on characters in a video game acting normal.

Hahahahaha. Who patented the "insane" and "novice" mode.

 

[OctaneInv]

I don't consider myself a Microsoft hater, but nor am I a fan. I feel they have used too many people to get to where they are, granted it's business, and they are damn good at what they do. I also have other reasons, but they are for a different topic, at another time. I use, and work on Windows boxes all of the time. I also use Adobe products. I think this lawsuit is the most frivolous thing I've ever seen (I didn't see the Nintendo one until just now ).

I hope Microsoft and Adobe win. In all honesty though, I couldn't care less. If there was a thread posted every time Microsoft was sued, [Insert shitty tag phrase here].