Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 9th Jan 2010 22:23 UTC
Legal "Microsoft has filed a second appeal in their XML patent case, claiming the original ruling could be dangerous for future patent cases. Last month, the software giant lost to tiny Canadian company i4i, and removed all infringing custom XML editing abilities from its Office 2003 and 2007 suite. Microsoft also paid USD 290 million in damages."
Thread beginning with comment 403435
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I wonder..
by BluenoseJake on Sun 10th Jan 2010 17:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I wonder.."
BluenoseJake
Member since:
2005-08-11

You have no evidence that they stole this, and considering what is at question here, the ability to store a word processing document as XML, and parse that document, it seems that this method would be apparent to any 2nd year CS major.

It's not MS that is at fault here, but the USPO. They never should have granted such a stupid patent.

Edited 2010-01-10 17:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: I wonder..
by zegenie on Sun 10th Jan 2010 17:36 in reply to "RE[3]: I wonder.."
zegenie Member since:
2005-12-31

considering what is at question here, the ability to store a word processing document as XML, and parse that document


That is incorrect. The patent - validity of software patents aside - is perfectly valid in the sense that it describes a specific way of performing a specific function, and is not at all that generic.

Albeit *related to* XML - it is nothing near as general as you try to portray it.

Edited 2010-01-10 17:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: I wonder..
by BluenoseJake on Mon 11th Jan 2010 00:11 in reply to "RE[4]: I wonder.."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

No, it is generic, because anybody processing documents in XML would eventually come up with this particular method. It is vague because it can be interpreted in multiple ways.

Oh, and just stating I am wrong, with out any valid arguments, do not make me wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: I wonder..
by jaypee on Mon 11th Jan 2010 18:54 in reply to "RE[3]: I wonder.."
jaypee Member since:
2005-07-28

You have no evidence that they stole this, and considering what is at question here, the ability to store a word processing document as XML, and parse that document, it seems that this method would be apparent to any 2nd year CS major.

It's not MS that is at fault here, but the USPO. They never should have granted such a stupid patent.


Actually, you have something that is very close to a smoking gun. An article in InformationWeek from this past August shares part of an email that turned up in discovery:

"We saw [i4i's products] some time ago and met its creators. Word 11 will make it obsolete," said Martin Sawicki, a member of Microsoft's XML for Word development team, in an e-mail to a colleague. "It looks great for XP though," wrote Sawicki, according to court records.

source: http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/enterpriseapps/showArt...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: I wonder..
by BluenoseJake on Mon 11th Jan 2010 20:00 in reply to "RE[4]: I wonder.."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

That's a smoking gun? That's not even a lit match

Reply Parent Score: 2