Judge Tells Microsoft It Can't Sell Word In U.S.
Thanks to a Texas judge's ruling earlier this week, Microsoft has been prohibited from selling or supporting any more copies of Word that can edit XML-based documents. A Toronto-based company, i4i, sued Microsoft in 2007 over its XML editing patent, and the judge ruled in i4i's favor. The ruling kicks in 60 days from now, unless Microsoft decides to appeal. We have a feeling it will.
i4i filed the lawsuit in March 2007, seeking an injunction and damages. The Eastern District of Texas is known for being a haven for patent litigation.
The injunction, which becomes effective in 60 days, prohibits Microsoft from selling future Word products that allegedly use the patented technology. It also enjoins Microsoft from testing, demonstrating, marketing or offering support for those future products.
Davis also ordered Microsoft to pay i4i more than $290 million in damages.
"Judge: Microsoft can't sell Word anymore" [Seattle PI]
Injunction (PDF) [Seattle PI]
Post a comment
Comments:
Egads. Um, as much as I dislike Microsoft's monopolistic tendencies, the Office Suite is pervasive for a reason. It's good. There isn't another program that's as good AND compatible out there.
NOTE: DO NOT say Open Office. I'm an engineer, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the equation editors are NOT compatible, and OO's isn't as good as M$'s.
What a joke of a patent. XML is an open standard.
Like other retarded patents, it sounds BROAD AS FUCK.
@katstermonster: DO NOT say Open Office. I'm an engineer, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the equation editors are NOT compatible, and OO's isn't as good as M$'s.
Me too, and I prefer OO's. Different strokes, I guess, but please don't say that MS's editor is unequivocally better.
May I be the first to say: HA HA!
@zegota: Sorry...different. Better for my uses. :) I also just find parts of OO to be too clunky. And not as pretty...cuz, you know, that's what it's all about. Heh.
@zegota: I also like to stick with M$'s because I often have to work on computers on which I don't have admin access. So no OO, and the compatibility issue kicks in.
@katstermonster: I like OO because it's free. Then again, I really only use the word processor, so... yeah.
the company is from canada and is suing MS in TExas which is in Seattle. Why texas? that particular district is renowned for siding with just about any patent that claims infringement. If this gets lifted higher than this asinine judge than it'll be thrown out. Meanwhile software patents kill puppies.
This is one of the many many reasons why software patents are bad, companies end up patenting anything and everything, and since it is software, they pretty much have to supply just a drawing and some text.
This image is the core of the complaint
And regardless if you understand it or not, it is a simple process, and regardless of prior art or anything, something like this should not be patentable.
For a simple and nonsensical example, patenting software is like patenting the outcome of 'Start at A, Move 5 steps, and turn right, then move 5 steps and turn left end at B'. so, now anything that can produce the exact results will fall under that patent. And, there are an infinite ways to get from A to B, yet, they are now all covered underneath that single patent. And since programming is just a series of small instructions to get a desired result, it has become easy to make some complicated sentences and end up patenting a software process to add two numbers.
This is compounded with the lack of in depth technical knowledge by people in the patent system, and all the way up to the judges who rule on the cases. It becomes a huge problem, and will only get worse.
@RecordStoreToughGuy: No, I love that about OO. And for basic word processing, it's great. But for the constant Excel and Word use I do, especially involvine equations, I need Office. And as I said...can't install OO on a number of computers I use every day.
My wife got the new Office suite on a new work pc (she works remotely from home). Since she moved into a different more supervisory role with her company, she has been using the thing more often.
Unforetunately Office's new DuploBlock level([en.wikipedia.org] )of interface has made it difficult for me to help her with what she needs to do as all the sh!t is in different interfaces and drop downs than I have come to use in over a decade of fighting Office products with Lego Expert/Technic level interfaces.
This begs the question- WTF didn't the goobs at Micro$oft figure on easy user interfaces to start with? Did MS drones always figure on MS Works for the entry level users?
Was this lack of easy interface behind the "Apples rule, PC's suck" rallying cry of the Mac folks for years?
Comments appreciated- Thanks.
@econobiker: Kind of clunky, but these pages were helpful to me. You scroll over options in the 2003 versions, and it tells you where is in 2007.
Word: [office.microsoft.com]
Excel: [office.microsoft.com]
As for why Microsoft hasn't gone with easy interfaces all along? Not really sure. I've always had this (totally unsupported) theory that a lot of that has to do with the fact that Microsoft's image seems to be more ornery and nerdy, whereas Apple's is more touchy-feely. Apple focused more on making things intuitive and pretty from the beginning, maybe just as a matter of the personalities of the people running things.
@katstermonster: I really only use the spreadsheet for grading, and MS's is easier than OO's for that. Still use OO, though, unless MS comes free.
Interesting that this went down in TX - not exactly a hotbed of liberalism and stick-it-to-the-man. Does that mean the evidence is very strong, or am I reading too much into the location?
@econobiker: omg, it took me 3 damn weeks to figure out where the print command was when they upgraded us at work!!!! How was I supposed to figure out the fucking BUBBLE in the upper left was clickable???????
@econobiker: I actually think the new user interface is quite a bit more efficient to use once you get used to them than the old way of having to wade through dialog boxes. It's radically different from how it used to work, which messes with people who have been using Word forever's mind at first, but I think it's an improvement.
@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!):
LOL!
You know.. they expect that when a user mouses over things and it goes a shiny colour - they will try to click it!
Some of office 2007 features are nice but others make me facepalm myself on a regular basis.
TVM for the internet and forums... what would we do in this day and age without them!
@johnva: Yeah, I don't get how this suit didn't get tossed with prejudice.
Then again, it is a Texas judge.
I don't believe for a minute that Word honestly has anything over WordPerfect for example...
MS smartly parlayed their OS dominance into office suite dominance. But there's nothing inherent about MS Office that makes it "better" than the Lotus or Corel offerings. Or for that matter OO.
@Crenshaw13: This particular patent court almost always sides with the patent-holders. They're just choosing the judge most likely to give them the "best" verdict.
@cristiana: Software patents filed with no intention to develop/implement/distribute or even license should be tossed out. Otherwise it's akin to squatting.
@katstermonster:
the Office Suite is pervasive for a reason
The reason being that it is SO bloated, that its all encompassing :P
It seems to me that a court in the Eastern District of Texas would not have a national jurisdiction, so their judgments would not have an effect in, say, New York.
@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): HAHAHAHAHA I have heard SO many people (a lot of them engineers) complain about the bubble, that its not even funny.
@logicalnoise: Yeah, sounded to me like i4i was exploiting a favorable court. The appellate level will turn out differently, I suspect.
Then again, i4i probably knows that, and is working out some kind of settlement so another court won't put a wrecking ball to their case.
@Crenshaw13: What Christovir said.
And yes, other than that, you are reading too much into the location... in the wrong direction.
Liberal does not necessarily mean that they will simply oppose the big corp without putting in any thought.
"liberalism" and "stick it to the man" are different things. Largely overlapping sets, yes, but neither of them are the subset of the other.
@YouDidWhatNow?: I dunno, I've used OO and a few other word processors and come out feeling like M$ Office is still the easiest to use/least buggy/most polished/etc. Maybe that's just me.
Also: that dominance is going to become a major issue if this lawsuit sticks. Aside from personal users, we're talking about offices all over the country that are solely dependent on M$ Office, and are going to have to find an entirely new suite, install it, and train people.
@econobiker: Actually Microsoft DID work out an excellent user interface for their Office products. In fact, it's the best suite of products the company makes — by far.
Unfortunately, that product doesn't run on Windows, believe it or not.
I'm talking about Office 2008 for Mac, which has cascading property panels, in addition to the old menu and toolbars. Moving through the property panels sounds like a pain in the neck but it's not. Once you've navigated it a few times, you don't want to go back either to the Ribbon interface or the pre-Ribbon versions.
And yes, I know those property panels aren't new to Microsoft. As far as I know they were first used by Macromedia (I recall them being in Freehand 5) and were adopted by Adobe as well, also long ago. I'm not saying they invented this ... I'm just saying it's a superior way of getting to all the features the Office programs have.
The ribbon interface is utterly useless. I gave it an honest year to try to get used to it...went back to 2003. Grandest usability fail I have ever seen.
The biggest problem I have with all this stuff is that not a single "new feature" of, say, a word processing program has been useful to 99% of the people on the face of the planet since, oh, 1995. Yes, I get it...there is somebody, someplace, who is all giggity about the new automatic cross-stich pattern enhancer that got put into Word 2009, or whatever...but seriously. The vast, VAST majority of people need a word processor to type in. Spell check. Format a font or two. Print. Pretty much it.
@YouDidWhatNow?: Just had another thought: the recent rise in Apple sales tends to argue against your "dominance" assertion. M$ created a crappy, bloated OS, and people went elsewhere.
It could just be that Justin Long is totally adorable as the Mac guy, though... :)
If the lawsuit "sticks" it's not going to hamper MS's ability to sell the product...it means they'll have to pay royalties. They're not going to take it off the market. The judge ordered them to stop selling it because it infringes a patent and they refuse to pay royalties...if they lose this case, ultimately, they'll just simply start paying royalties. And the ever-affordable MS Office will go from it's attractive $600 price point and go to an unbearable $605.
@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): When my old job upgraded everyone, we collectively spent about a week reinventing the wheel. I was the one who had the time and ability to just take five full hours rebuilding myself a toolbar and learning where all the functions went, so I became the teacher-to-all. That was HARD.
My current (new-since-then) company is still on Office 2003, and has 5000 employees to my last job's 45. I shudder to think what a mess it will be around here when the time finally comes that they have to upgrade...
@katstermonster: that site (portableapps) has been a godsend to me.. firefox and gimp at work? hell yes!
@YouDidWhatNow?: Ah, gotcha...missed the royalties bit. That's a pain. Although a *.edu email gets you Ultimate for 60 bucks...not a bad deal.
The "trend" you speak of is far more perception than reality. I'm pretty sure MS is fine with Apple having somewhere in the neighborhood of 7% of the possible market or so.
...Apple: Crash Different. Oh, and pay us 50% more for our crap than comparable PC stuff, and then don't have any ability to use the vast majority of software on the market too. And watch out when it blows up.
I knew it was an Eastern District of Texas judge just from the Consumerist headline.
A patent to edit XML? Then wouldn't EVERY text editor infringe on that patent? Even if it's a patent that covers mapping RTF tags to XML via schemas, that's the entire purpose behind SGML (the progenitor to XML and HTML).
@MostlyHarmless: Indeed. As an example, I seem to remember a number of Supreme Court Justices, who would hardly self-apply the term "conservative" as a descriptor, ruling in favor of something decidedly not "stick it to the man".
I kinda get a feeling that this is a bit retarded. But then, I havent bothered to RTFA.