Microsoft holds off on Eolas-based tweaks

TalkBack 18 of 22:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Microsoft's claim of Prior Art is False...

In yet another example of rigging a demonstration (remember the antitrust trial) Microsft attempted to rig the demo of the Viola browser, which it claimed was prior art! While the court records are not online, an account is available here:

http://www.rkmc.com/pdf/ip_of_the_year.pdf

Note that Peng Wie was unable to demonstrate the "remote download" aspect of the patent using the software he demonstrated to Sun. If he cannot demonstrate the whole of the claims of the patent, then his is not prior art. That's why the judge threw out this "evidence". He didn't approve of Microsft attempting to cheat the court.

In fact, the judge has wieghed in on the patent reconsideration. He has said, "One possible reason to believe that the reexamination would not take long is that, according to the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination policy, the reexamination was triggered by a ?substantial outcry? from the Internet community. The most prominent among the creators of the Web, Sir Timothy Berners- Lee, expressed the view that the PTO had missed clear prior art. Judging from the record before me, it is safe to say that some of the outcry arises from the view of a significant portion of Web experts, including Berners-Lee, that royalties ought not to be paid patented Web innovations. This contingent believes instead that Web invention is for the good of humanity and not the inventor. If this is the true reason for the reexamination, then I doubt the reexamination will take very long."

In other words, from the court record the judge has concluded that the evidence pro-Microsft is very, very weak and that Sir Tim is grasping at straws in an attempt to overturn the patent. "Good of society" is a wonderful falacious argument, an appeal to emotion, but it is not a legally arguable fact. The judge rightly concludes that should fact triumph over emotion; the reconsideration will be stamped "rejected" and the Eolas' patent will remain in force.

Let's add that to the reputed and unconfirmed, recent forced retirement by the very person responsible for patent reconsiderations? The reconsideration was already to have been acted upon and issued, except that the Patent Commisioner resigned recently? Does this possibly smack of extra-office influence? Perhaps, or perhaps not.

All in all, I smell something very, very fishy going on here. The smell comes from Redmond and Washington DC, but the stench is permeating the web. Microsoft is spinning wildly, painting the judge in a bad light in press releases, while ignoring that their own rigging of the demo forced the demo to be thrown out. What they were unable to achieve in the courtroom they now decide to rig in the USPTO with the unwitting help of the W3C.

I am personally against software patents, but I hate to see people jump to incorrect conclusions based on bad evidence.

Posted by: John Le'Brecage   Posted on: 01/30/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now