On mySimon: Tom Ford Aviator Sunglasses
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 17 of 169:
Next »
« Previous
To be critical of the article.
"In Amado v. Microsoft, filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March 7, 2003, the plaintiff has accused the link table functionality available in Microsoft Access when used with Microsoft Excel. After a jury trial, we were found to infringe one claim of the patent and damages were awarded in the amount of $8.9 million. The judge later found for us on our defense of laches, which reduced the damages award to $5.9 million. The court also imposed an injunction against further distribution of the accused feature as part of Microsoft Access, but stayed the injunction pending appellate review."

http://www.microsoft.com/msft/download/FY06/MSFT_1Q2006_10Q.doc

Notice that the reporters covered the story poorly. I assume this is an outsourced story as are most of these stories for anyone could have easily preformed a google search to find that the award has been adjusted (that's what I did and it took only a few seconds).

Microsoft does not note the patent number nor did it note the case number. In both instances the reporting could have included both but did not.

Why can't people report the news AND fill in simple details?

Case: 8:03-cv-00242-DOC-AN, Judge is David O. Carter

I could not verify the patent to be anything other then 5,701,400 in my simple search. That's the only patent that comes up under the inventors name as you indicated.
Posted by: MO411   Posted on: 01/31/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

No biggy  Boot_Agnostic | 01/30/06
Open source software not necessarily free of Patent Infringments  drhender | 01/30/06
This is a cease and desist order I own the Patent  IceTheNet@... | 01/30/06
RE: This is a cease and desist order I own the Patent  OmegaFirebolt | 01/30/06
Not exactly...  Still Lynn | 01/30/06
you are missing the point  eLurker | 01/30/06
No biggy  c-o-b | 01/31/06
Howdy  Boot_Agnostic | 01/31/06
Oh the joys of patents! (NT)  P. Douglas | 01/30/06
The patent situation has gotten so NUTS that all the  Laff | 01/30/06
Patents of Software  jack@... | 01/30/06
Music to the RIAA's Ears  kjgslg@... | 01/30/06
Patents vs Copyright??  mtn.brk@... | 01/30/06
It changed in 1995  wookey | 01/30/06
I love how these patent trolls ...  Too Old For IT | 01/30/06
What patent number?  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
To be critical of the article.  MO411 | 01/31/06
Microsoft Indemnity Against IP Claims  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
re:Microsoft Indemnity Against IP Claims  Edward@... | 01/31/06
And yet  lengua99 | 02/05/06
Not Really  cwtryon | 03/02/06
Kill software patents  jrepin | 01/30/06
Kill software patents  stevem_001 | 01/30/06
So that means...  WayneB@... | 01/30/06
Yes Exactly  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
Greener pastures??? And that would be...Where??  Cayble | 01/30/06
Free as in?  Too Old For IT | 01/30/06
Well yeah, I've heard your argument before...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Yup!  Update victim | 01/30/06
No...  techboy_z | 01/30/06
No. That's what copyright protection is for.  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
Killing us???  Bearberries | 01/30/06
Amen  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Show me your inventions  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
Remember GIF?  MO411 | 01/31/06
Another peon defending the Robber Barons...  hulse_kevin | 01/30/06
really don't agree with that emotional plea  ej00807 | 01/30/06
PAYBACK!  tedego | 01/30/06
And yet...  rapson | 01/30/06
Yes...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Patent Infringement "Breaking the Law"  PMC-CON | 01/30/06
Well then  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Missing the point.  Still Lynn | 01/30/06
Um...  Real World | 01/31/06
Of course! However...  Dr_Zinj | 01/31/06
???  eLurker | 01/30/06
Wow! 500,000 desktops  StorageGuru | 01/30/06
i can  eLurker | 01/30/06
it is hard?  sackbut | 01/30/06
t-bone: ok  eLurker | 01/30/06
never have -  ArtMac | 01/30/06
you brought it up  eLurker | 01/30/06
How easily will Microsoft be able to rewrite?  I am Gorby | 01/30/06
that is the issue, isnt it?  eLurker | 01/30/06
Amen, I say...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
You poor clueless fool  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/30/06
Is a license not a copywrite?  ArtMac | 01/30/06
License vs. copyright  FirstNLastN | 01/30/06
No, a license is a license, nothing more.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/30/06
ummm  eLurker | 01/30/06
Wow. There was a time when....  John Zern | 01/30/06
Jya... Jeez...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Get a good lawyer to argue...  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
Mutually ensured destruction!  I am Gorby | 01/30/06
which means  eLurker | 01/30/06
Guatemalan ?  drdug | 01/30/06
Why not mention it?  el1jones | 01/30/06
Zenophobe?  Ghostdog36c | 01/30/06
Definitions...  Chryse | 01/30/06
It could mean  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Fear of Novel Management tools?  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
Nationality may be pertinent  Dr_Zinj | 01/31/06
Maybe you are the xenophobe...  MV_z | 02/03/06
Well then...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Go Play With Safari Some Place Else (nt)  PMC-CON | 01/30/06
which means...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
you might  eLurker | 01/30/06
let's see...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
neither  eLurker | 01/30/06
Explain this to me.  DemonX | 01/30/06
You're right, naturally,  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Are You by Any Chance A New Version of DonnieBoy?(nt)  PMC-CON | 01/30/06
That has dark overtones,  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Same coin, different side.  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
patent infringement != code ripping  Allstar_z | 01/30/06
Prove that  ArtMac | 01/30/06
ok  eLurker | 01/30/06
The reason  stephen0838_z | 01/30/06
Patents abound  jsjag1 | 01/30/06
You obviously haven't tried to  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Yeah right...  artplus@... | 01/30/06
Yeah, I get where you're coming from...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
but where are you coming from?  eLurker | 01/30/06
I've got no problem with MS,  ArtMac | 01/30/06
you have some sort of problem  eLurker | 01/30/06
very forgiving of you  davagain | 01/30/06
Best post for this article...by far (nt)  Real World | 01/31/06
check the dates on that  rock06r | 01/30/06
I have to agree  Leria | 01/30/06
Yes.....Way too far  catlovr-20723788969807198650981698774804 | 01/30/06
What did the court do?  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Software patents are good ...  phil@... | 01/30/06
What patent number?  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
Think again...  artplus@... | 01/30/06
?  eLurker | 01/30/06
Thank you  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Guatemala, Mexico, Latino...  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
some are, some are not  tima_z | 01/30/06
Patent on software are good, not patents on code  Leria | 01/30/06
Re: Patent on software are good, not patents on code  Programmer384 | 01/30/06
re: sw patents in europe  werner2k_z | 01/31/06
Insanity  sjpatrick | 01/30/06
Would have been far easier  Ken_z | 01/30/06
But...  rapson | 01/30/06
What's the difference?  tic swayback | 01/30/06
The difference is...  rapson | 01/31/06
Okay, Rapson. I'll bite.  The King's Servant | 01/30/06
Two points  rapson | 01/31/06
Why are we arguing?  The King's Servant | 01/31/06
You mean YOUR villainy...  John Zern | 01/30/06
For every processor...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
That's still a different issue  woot! | 01/30/06
My humble apologies.  sjpatrick | 01/30/06
Ahem...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
Patent  Jafrh | 01/30/06
A five year limit on software patents  John Carroll ZDNet Moderator | 01/30/06
But what  ArtMac | 01/30/06
I think you may be confusing  tima_z | 01/30/06
then you  Shelendrea | 01/31/06
Probably not  j.m.galvin | 01/30/06
Re : Probably not  bushell@... | 01/30/06
Re-think...  Still Lynn | 01/30/06
How about ZERO  Mectron | 01/30/06
The irony  Richard Flude | 01/30/06
ZDNet headlines... Sheesh... It's NOT an upgrade.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/30/06
wow...  ArtMac | 01/30/06
That depends on how you look at it..  Patrick Jones | 01/31/06
What does 'up' mean?  The King's Servant | 01/31/06
Not an Upgrade???  30bob1 | 01/31/06
Correction: users have a cost associated with the update...  The King's Servant | 01/31/06
Why?  Gravitas@... | 01/30/06
Sigh.  woot! | 01/30/06
you have fallen for it  eLurker | 01/30/06
The trouble is  pbiss | 01/30/06
No 'technical' requirement now  Nigel Johnstone | 01/30/06
Obvious patents...  astro_z | 01/30/06
What's good for the goose...  HypnoToad | 01/30/06
What friggin planet are you from???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/30/06
You do not cooperate in a competitive market.  osreinstall | 01/30/06
What is a software patent?  newgeek2be | 01/30/06
When you could talk to CPM  npolimeni@... | 01/30/06
This is the system that Bill Gates is fighting so hard to implement in E.U.  mobrien_12@... | 01/30/06
Good one, let your customer pay instead of  tombalablomba | 01/31/06
Software patents are NOT bad.  jimroar2000 | 01/31/06
Sssorry, but IP is an oxymoron,  Update victim | 01/31/06
You are correct, but whats there in Microsoft's Office???  vinshe | 02/11/06
Can't make money any more? Share it on Emule  GreatInca | 01/31/06
All patent laws must die [nt]  Omch'Ar | 01/31/06
Re: Correction  30bob1 | 01/31/06
Re: Correction: users have a cost associated with the update...  30bob1 | 01/31/06
OOOOPS  30bob1 | 01/31/06
How come do they have time for it?  adelagza@... | 01/31/06
REPLIES  tonyscot@... | 01/31/06
Garbage  biggestred | 02/01/06
Failure of aquiring technology  pj-xmesh | 02/01/06
All entities affected by M$'s GREED and patent Steeling should  btljooz | 02/01/06
Patents  jervin | 02/01/06
15 - Luv GPL leads  greavesg | 02/08/06
Microsoft Starts To Fight A Losing Battle...  vinshe | 02/11/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here