ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "I4i v. Microsoft (2009, USA)"

m (A patent troll?: According to Microsoft's Motion for Emergency Stay, i4i inc. didn't lose profits when Microsoft released Word 2003 and actually improved it's revenue after the release of Microso)
Line 18: Line 18:
 
This is a good example of why software patents are so bad (even though, ironically, it hurts one of their strongest exponents).  The i4i patent is very broadly worded and the appeal judge has decided that it applies in areas which one might expect to be beyond the original intent.  As a result, the infringing party may soon face withdrawing or reducing functionality of their product, with the result that millions of users around the world may suffer pointless inconvenience and incompatibility in their everyday software.
 
This is a good example of why software patents are so bad (even though, ironically, it hurts one of their strongest exponents).  The i4i patent is very broadly worded and the appeal judge has decided that it applies in areas which one might expect to be beyond the original intent.  As a result, the infringing party may soon face withdrawing or reducing functionality of their product, with the result that millions of users around the world may suffer pointless inconvenience and incompatibility in their everyday software.
  
* Judges can't be expected to understand and rule on this sort of thing
 
 
* Software ideas are so abstract, the boundaries of their description are unclear
 
* Software ideas are so abstract, the boundaries of their description are unclear
 
* Expecting all XML programmers to have been monitoring i4i's filings is excessive, so [[infringement is unavoidable]]
 
* Expecting all XML programmers to have been monitoring i4i's filings is excessive, so [[infringement is unavoidable]]

Revision as of 11:48, 26 August 2009

i4i v. Microsoft was a 2009 court case in the USA of software patent litigation where Microsoft was convicted, by a jury, of wilfully infringing an XML patent of i4i inc. The venue was the East Texas district court. On appeal, Microsoft lost again and the damages were increased to $290 million.

The issue at stake was a claimed patent infringement by Microsoft's implementation of "custom XML", a proprietary extension within Word's native OOXML document format. Microsoft may be forced to withdraw current versions of Word and to remove or reduce the functionality of the OOXML format from future versions.

i4i inc. has confirmed that the free software OpenOffice.org word processor does not infringe this patent.[1]

Official case documents

Problems highlighted

This is a good example of why software patents are so bad (even though, ironically, it hurts one of their strongest exponents). The i4i patent is very broadly worded and the appeal judge has decided that it applies in areas which one might expect to be beyond the original intent. As a result, the infringing party may soon face withdrawing or reducing functionality of their product, with the result that millions of users around the world may suffer pointless inconvenience and incompatibility in their everyday software.

  • Software ideas are so abstract, the boundaries of their description are unclear
  • Expecting all XML programmers to have been monitoring i4i's filings is excessive, so infringement is unavoidable
  • XML formats are generally part of an attempt to improve compatibility for users. Blocking similar uses of such ideas is not in consumers' interests. With data formats, innovation is useless because compatibility is the goal.
  • MS should be free to write and distribute software.

Who is i4i inc.?

i4i inc. ("Infrastructures for Information") is company founded in 1993,[2] based in Toronto, Canada.[3] They filed their complaint against Microsoft on March 8th 2007.[4] Microsoft visited i4i around 2003 while looking for software with features similar to the now-disputed CustomXML.[5]

In an undated email which can be placed somewhere, a developer on Microsoft's XML for Word team wrote to a colleague "We saw [i4i's products] some time ago and met its creators. Word 11 will make it obsolete".[6] Word 11 was released in 2003, and this email was probably sent before or soon after Word 11's release.

A patent troll?

The patent is held by "i4i LP" (not i4i inc.), and the litigation is financed by Northwater Patent Fund.Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag which show it being on sale since March 2003.[7] According to Microsoft's Motion for Emergency Stay, i4i inc. didn't lose profits when Microsoft released Word 2003 and actually improved it's revenue after the release of Microsoft Word 2003.[8]

Trial misconduct

$40 million was added to the judgement against Microsoft for making arguments that were "persistent, legally improper, and in direct violation of the Court's instructions".[9] During the trial, Microsoft repeatedly argued that i4i was wrong to demand damages since they themselves don't produce a product (i.e. they're a patent troll). This was judged to be misconduct because there is no law against what i4i is doing, and it is not relevant to case.

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

Press coverage

Groklaw

References