Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Dell and HP Back Microsoft in Word Lawsuit

Last response: in News comments
Share
August 28, 2009 11:16:21 PM

Patent law in USA is screwed... period. It worked in my favor, but it is still screwed.

Instead of encouraging discovery, advancing science, it serves to damage everyone except a selected few. Screwed, screwed, screwed.
August 28, 2009 11:37:15 PM

^thats the core problem of modern world.
Related resources
August 28, 2009 11:50:20 PM

hennnryPatent law in USA is screwed... period. It worked in my favor, but it is still screwed.Instead of encouraging discovery, advancing science, it serves to damage everyone except a selected few. Screwed, screwed, screwed.

Agreed! +10000
August 29, 2009 1:02:19 AM

Quote:
(including the how the injunction would effect Dell)

effect -> affect

The injunction affects Dell therefore causing an effect.
August 29, 2009 1:10:34 AM

Would not bother me at all, why don't they just switch to Open Office? ;) 
August 29, 2009 2:25:59 AM

That's right, i'm going to invest in a company who's sole purpose is to create programing techniques, technologies and so on, patent them, never make any use of these new innovations, and never let anyone else use them either.

I'd estimate this stupid planet is at LEAST a few hundred years behind in scientific/technological/psychological evolution/progression because of garbaged brained mentalities such as this.

end of rant -.-
August 29, 2009 2:49:00 AM

So what, if you are a big corporation with deep pockets you are above the law? Even if you abuse the same scenario and laws in different situations when it's in you favor?

Cough up the dough... injunctions are meant to force wrong doers into complaince.
August 29, 2009 3:27:36 AM

the associateThat's right, i'm going to invest in a company who's sole purpose is to create programing techniques, technologies and so on, patent them, never make any use of these new innovations, and never let anyone else use them either.I'd estimate this stupid planet is at LEAST a few hundred years behind in scientific/technological/psychological evolution/progression because of garbaged brained mentalities such as this.end of rant -.-


I often think to myself "If aliens were watching us right now, what would they think?" (I know; I probably think too much) :) 

The only thing keeping us from being exterminated by aliens is that the human race is too pathetic to bother with lol :D 
August 29, 2009 8:58:48 AM

As near as I can tell the U.S. patent process is completely screwy. You don't have to build anything or make anything to obtain a patent. The U.S. Patent Office issued a patent for a Star Trek type transporter even though the transporter does not exist. Hmmmm....I wonder if there might be one at Area 54.
August 29, 2009 9:06:11 AM

Microsoft.... to big to fail.
August 29, 2009 12:19:12 PM

"Making such a change would require extensive time- and resource- consuming testing," Dell said.

Cry me a friggin river. All you have to do is take the 60-day trial of microsoft office out of your OS image.
August 29, 2009 12:38:05 PM

AMERIKKKA!
August 29, 2009 1:41:07 PM

Well, the problem here is really Mirosoft. They have been known to use other people's work and using it as if it was their own. In the academic world, this is called plagiarism. Wasn't there an article about Microsoft using OpenSource code in their Windows OS? The OpenSource folks didn't go after them. However, this time, they are on the end of a big stick.

The American Dream can be based on these patent ideas. The American Dream is also to sue and counter sue. In some ways, it is about time that someone get Microsoft to think a little more before going into production with code created by other. Presently, there is a patent infringement, they have the money to fix it; they have over $40 billion sitting in cash. They can help the economy by deploying some of that! As for Dell and HP ... they should actually sue Microsoft for not living up to it's end of the partnership?? Start shipping OpenOffice as an alternative?
August 29, 2009 4:11:28 PM

wongedWell, the problem here is really Mirosoft. They have been known to use other people's work and using it as if it was their own. In the academic world, this is called plagiarism. Wasn't there an article about Microsoft using OpenSource code in their Windows OS? The OpenSource folks didn't go after them. However, this time, they are on the end of a big stick.The American Dream can be based on these patent ideas. The American Dream is also to sue and counter sue. In some ways, it is about time that someone get Microsoft to think a little more before going into production with code created by other. Presently, there is a patent infringement, they have the money to fix it; they have over $40 billion sitting in cash. They can help the economy by deploying some of that! As for Dell and HP ... they should actually sue Microsoft for not living up to it's end of the partnership?? Start shipping OpenOffice as an alternative?

Open source formats? Uhh, I think there's Hundreds of open source formats but Microsoft gets picked on for using one that is open source. The developers forfeit profit when they make it open source. They should shove it.

But what does Apple do? They basically stole BSD from the hands of the developers.
August 29, 2009 5:08:48 PM

Ryun"Making such a change would require extensive time- and resource- consuming testing," Dell said.Cry me a friggin river. All you have to do is take the 60-day trial of microsoft office out of your OS image.

Which means pulling all those image disks out destroying them putting together a new image and shipping out the new image. Then recalling all of the word software sold and replacing it with something else (in several months due to the programming and testing cycles) or refunding their money. Lots of destroying of dollars in what you suggest doing. In a time where margins are shrinking and sales are dropping it’s not a good thing to do to a company. Of course you don't have any responsibility to make any money for anyone so you can make those decisions
August 29, 2009 5:48:45 PM

Who really knows if MS stole the idea as many have suggested, or they developed it on their own around the same time and someone failed to recognize the code needed to be patented? Wouldn't be the first time a big company through it's shear size made a major mistake. Then again they might have. If so, they will, in the end, pay.

Ford failed to re-up copyrights on the Cobra, GT40, and a few other names because a bean counter saw a place to shave a few pennies, oops.

Go look at the chaos with the invention of the light bulb, is this the same here or otherwise? It only shows patent chaos isn't a new problem.

Before hammering a stake through the heart...prove it, the legal matter isn't over. This is only an attempt by MS to keep selling this key product and the burden it places on downstream companies. I don't understand why the judge was so determined to stop the sale of Word. Was he so naive that he thought MS wouldn't appeal? I doubt it. The redesign of code and the number of product on the shelves is an unreasonable expensive for MS to correct on such short notice. This case has not come to a final determination, it is being appealed, therefore not final. If MS loses in the end the patent holder will still be paid, even on the product sold during the appeal period. MS isn't going to disappear. This part of the ruling appears to be arbitrary and vindictive.
August 29, 2009 6:03:27 PM

I would think if you can't do your job with a certain amount of integrity and responsibility... you shouldn't be doing your job.

Hey, wait a minute... wasn't Microsoft founded off stealing other peoples ideas and Making money off them? without giving credit where credit is due?
August 29, 2009 7:02:40 PM

This is absolutely retarded. We got huge companies at stake here and American jobs all because some losers that had a patent 15 years ago. Why would they wait until Microsoft Word has been a stable for almost 15 years and then attack it. The patent system should ignore their lawsuit because the guys behind it are idiots and not in it for protection of "intellectual property" and are in it for Microsoft's $$$$.
August 29, 2009 10:41:58 PM

Although this is like ... "crap telling shit it dont stink"
i gotta admit.. i think this is a bit overboard... with MS on this one.
August 30, 2009 8:48:29 AM

Hello everybody, i'm am very concerned. I downloaded and compiled a sample C++ program called "Hello world". Can i distribute the hello_world.exe file on my web site? Or could there be a some patent, which i may infringe?
Or if there is no patent for "Hello world" program concept, can i get that patent for myself in order to sue other people and companys to get big money for me? You understand, i am immigrant from Kazakhstan and want to start good life here in USA, so please help me with that patent thing - in return i will issue you a patent to use my sister for free in any purpose you will think is approppriate!
August 30, 2009 8:48:42 AM

Just say no to software patents.

Anyway Dell and HP sell alot of PCs with trials of MS Office on them. It would be a huge pain for them to have to format all those PCs and make a new images without the Office Trial. Talk about a huge expense, not to mention the few bucks per PC they get for putting that on there in the first place. Those images have to be tested, and then PCs that are already assembled would have to be formatted with the new image, and then there's the disruption of sales since they can't ship out PCs because their too busy taking MS Office out of them.
August 30, 2009 8:49:29 AM

borath_the_greatHello everybody, i'm am very concerned. I downloaded and compiled a sample C++ program called "Hello world". Can i distribute the hello_world.exe file on my web site? Or could there be a some patent, which i may infringe? Or if there is no patent for "Hello world" program concept, can i get that patent for myself in order to sue other people and companys to get big money for me? You understand, i am immigrant from Kazakhstan and want to start good life here in USA, so please help me with that patent thing - in return i will issue you a patent to use my sister for free in any purpose you will think is approppriate!


lol
August 30, 2009 12:09:00 PM

All m$ fankiddies whining in unison, when their idol is getting it. When suehappy m$ was on the sending side, there was no problem with patents, they just promoted "innovation", isn't it?
It was just about time, that m$ would gulp it's own medicine, which it happily prescribed to others. Bitter, eh?
As for the likes of HP and Dell, they can just shove their crappy products and services back in their a$$es.
August 30, 2009 1:00:31 PM

If Microsoft broke the law, and it affects their partners, well, thats life.

If I start a company, develop something, and get it patented, and some huge monopoly steals it, They own me every penny my work earned me.

Microsoft, HP, Dell, and the like did not get to where they are by backing down and being nice to their competition.

Anonymous
August 31, 2009 1:16:55 AM

@demonhorde665: NO, you can't do whatever you want with it just because it's open source. There are various licenses that are issued with it, all of the greater/lesser GPL/GNU/Gwhatever licenses usually state that you can't make it closed source, among other things. If it's my intellectual property, then I can claim whatever license rights I want for it, just like Microsoft. You're no better than somebody who is pirating a copy of Windows, with the attitude like "haha sucker, you gave me the source code, you're fucked now!!! I'm going to steal it and use it, and you can't stop me!!!!".
August 31, 2009 7:44:33 AM

Why are you guys so Clueless? Step back, and take a look at the big picture not just your picture (mostly your personal "experience"). This should be your first question: Why aren't all the Big Companies not using Open Office? Open Office is great....for home use and small companies - maybe even some mid size companies. But in the Corporate and Multi-Billion Dollar Companies (The Corporate world is where MS makes most of its $$$$) like - example: 3M, Open Office will not due.

MS Office is just better designed to meet the "corporate world" while Open Office is not. I don't use Open Office extensively but I know Open office does not do or mimick everything MS office can do. That is why Open Office has not or yet been accepted by Corporations. Think of this: OpenOffice = free, MS = $200/license. What would you rather get? "Free" Ofcourse. Corporately, I am also sure (rolls eyes) they prefer "Free", but Open Office just doesn't come close to what MS Office can provide. There have also been many people who have posted what MS Office provides over Open Office and again, I don't use Open Office extensively so I can't quote specifics of the MS Office's specific adavantage.

The other side to this is big Corporations buy and or lease OEM PC's from DELL and HP 90% of thetime. So I can see Dell and HP's decision in this as well.

I am no fan of MS and MS should pay up, but if MS does pull MS Office, the ramification from thise move is going to be pretty harsh.
August 31, 2009 1:55:03 PM

Have some of the commenters READ the patent, or have you just parused through the article and jumped on the "bandwagon" that MS should just pay. Wait, you guys sound like the guy that sits on the other side of the phone that tells you to pay your overdue bills who has no clue why...
For all of you too lazy to find the patent language, I have posted it
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Se...

It sounds to me (even though it makes little sense with all the mechanical errors. a.k.a. could have been writen better by monkeys) that these 6 guys patented editing XML files, saving them, and giving "hints" to other apps so these said apps dont have to understand the file(A title page I guess)....
If MS is held to this judgement, whos to say that apple wont be next or any other word processor that you can work with XML on that uses a XSD file for coding.

And tom's, please make us informed readers by giving us some background information on the topics that you give news on. Knowing what the patent was about other than it's involves XML that was stated in a previous article would be really helpful. Some of us reading these articles dont have time to find the background info.
August 31, 2009 2:10:29 PM

The biggest fail is that i4i's patent shouldn't have even been approved. Its riddles with vague details and point to no clear design. They more than likely never could produce anything other than a broad idea and where luck to patent it.
August 31, 2009 2:16:05 PM

JN77If Microsoft broke the law, and it affects their partners, well, thats life.If I start a company, develop something, and get it patented, and some huge monopoly steals it, They own me every penny my work earned me.Microsoft, HP, Dell, and the like did not get to where they are by backing down and being nice to their competition.


They didn't develop anything, did you even read the patent? Apple, Adobe, etc will be effected because they use their own version off the XML coding and all i4i did was develop a vague/broad patent (which shouldn't have even been approved). I really wonder who the hell wrote it as it mechanically doesn't make since and if it did would apply to just about every form of XML.
Anonymous
August 31, 2009 4:13:34 PM

r3t4rd: You do know that big corporations pay like $2 a copy for Office and XP, right? That is pretty much the real reason big corporations use it, if they had to pay full retail, they probably would use OpenOffice.


PS: That kind of pricing scheme constitutes abuse of MS's monopoly power.
August 31, 2009 5:21:49 PM

the associateThat's right, i'm going to invest in a company who's sole purpose is to create programing techniques, technologies and so on, patent them, never make any use of these new innovations, and never let anyone else use them either.I'd estimate this stupid planet is at LEAST a few hundred years behind in scientific/technological/psychological evolution/progression because of garbaged brained mentalities such as this.end of rant -.-


Apparently its a big thing now. I have friends who worked for companies who do not actually have any clients, buyers or products. All they do is R&D all day long and patent stuff left and right. Sometimes a company will come in to pay for rights to a patent, but apparently the company they worked for made their money on patent infringement lawsuits. The company eventually went out of business and the owner died in his car a few weeks later or something.
August 31, 2009 6:01:20 PM

I've reviewed the patent. Although I agree that it shouldn't have been filed, it's filed and we gotta live with that.

I believe that MS is not in violation of the patent with Word 2007, but that they were in violation of a part with Word 2003. Word 2007 stores the file as a PKzip single file that is actually an archive with multiple files and folders. No single piece represents the document, though the unformatted body is found in a file called document.xml. So the patent doesn't apply here.

The judge has been misled, which is easy to do with a non-technical judge. As a prosecutor, you just size him up and bamboozle him.
September 1, 2009 3:42:30 AM

E7130They didn't develop anything, did you even read the patent? Apple, Adobe, etc will be effected because they use their own version off the XML coding and all i4i did was develop a vague/broad patent (which shouldn't have even been approved). I really wonder who the hell wrote it as it mechanically doesn't make since and if it did would apply to just about every form of XML.
Apparently, you didn't understand the patent. It's specific to "custom XML", and it's even more specific to a method of separating the formating information from the main text rather than embedding the formatting info in the text. This will only affect companies who have used custom XML in a specific way.

Whether or not the patent should have been issued or should be overturned, is a separate issue. At issue presently is whether or not MS WILLFULLY infringed i4i's patent, and MS's own emails indicate they did so knowingly. MS could have, and perhaps should have, challenged the patent, but the have not done that, instead, they chose to violate the patent. Now they are requesting to be excused from having to pay the consequences of willfully violating a patent.
September 1, 2009 9:00:28 AM

r3t4rd_by_name_r3t4rd_by_reputationr3t4rd: You do know that big corporations pay like $2 a copy for Office and XP, right? That is pretty much the real reason big corporations use it, if they had to pay full retail, they probably would use OpenOffice.PS: That kind of pricing scheme constitutes abuse of MS's monopoly power.


Sorry to say, but you fail. To note, my Company is a Top10 Fortune 500 company just to show you the size and mass of the IT support I have to do and 15yrs of doing it. That out of the way, my Company does not get XP/Vista for $2 a license. XP/Vista is an enterprise license and I don't know the expense of this because I don't sit ontop of the corporate IT thrown in my Company (so maybe you can say $2 but I highly doubt it)nor is it in my job description to know my company's expenditures that does not immediately affect my daily job. MS Office on the other hand, I have to keep track and update the corporate database of each licensed install at $200 a piece.

Here is the facts, sometimes a company (example my compmany) buys products and services from another company at a discount price vs regular consumers. What I have noticed is that this can also be reversed. Example: when I order parts and or supplies, there are specific partners. These partners that my company has a contract with charges full retail. That is just the way things are between companies - because it is company to company, not company to consumers. Another example, my first yrs working in my Comapny's IT dept, 40GB driver for $100 vs New Egg $60. I went to my boss and said we can save $40 if we purchase it through here. My boss would say no. I didn't understand it back then but have a better grasp and understanding now. It all boils down to logistics and easy/quick support for products and services. I can go more into this but will refrain from writing a book.

Quote:
Have some of the commenters READ the patent, or have you just parused through the article and jumped on the "bandwagon" that MS should just pay. Wait, you guys sound like the guy that sits on the other side of the phone that tells you to pay your overdue bills who has no clue why...
For all of you too lazy to find the patent language, I have posted it
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph [...] /7,571,169


Sorry but I am guilty of this and acknowledge. And as a News/Blog site such as Toms, I read what I can and take what its spewed here sometimes with a grain of salt. I don't have all the time in my work day to go reading lawsuits and patents etc. Nor do I want to once I get home. I think I am like most people, we just want to unravel and relax play with our kids instead of jumping onto the web and finding out the details of said item.

Regardless, I see your point if MS falls its a domino with this XML code patent. But as most people here have stated, the US Patent system is the most Frakked-up system - PERIOD.
September 1, 2009 9:20:27 AM

r3t4rd_by_name_r3t4rd_by_reputationr3t4rd: You do know that big corporations pay like $2 a copy for Office and XP, right? That is pretty much the real reason big corporations use it, if they had to pay full retail, they probably would use OpenOffice.PS: That kind of pricing scheme constitutes abuse of MS's monopoly power.


Forgot...

Lets say even at $2 a license. That is still $2. Do the math and add 100K of workstations. If I owned a company I'd want to save as much as I can. Why would I want to spend X amount of dollars on MS office when Open Office is free? Come on its FREE!! But, why haven't my Company I work for and many others change to Open Office? I think I've already answered that question. Most people who work in said same position as I do will probbaly agree 100% with me on this one.

I do agree with you on one item though, in my opinion, MS is a Monopolistic entity to a certain extent.
!