11–20 of 72 posts
I am glad that a patent troll has directly attacked one of the software giants. Now hopefully Microsoft with its deep pockets and legal team can crush this troll.
Microsoft lose in such cases surprisingly often. Smart Tags in Office, onclick activation of plugins in IE...
Is it possible to sue a patent troll for time and legal fees if you win the original case? I know they are basically shell corporations, but it would be great to see these patent cases incurring some risk for the trolls.
I am glad that a patent troll has directly attacked one of the software giants. Now hopefully Microsoft with its deep pockets and legal team can crush this troll.
Is it possible to sue a patent troll for time and legal fees if you win the original case? I know they are basically shell corporations, but it would be great to see these patent cases incurring some risk for the trolls.
http://www.flhlaw.com/pubs/xprPubDetail.aspx?xpST=PubDetail&...
"Under Section 285 of the Patent statute, courts have discretion to award reasonable attorneys’ fees in patent infringement cases that are deemed “exceptional.” 35 U.S.C. § 285. The Federal Circuit noted that while the threat of enhanced damages for willful infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 284 deters bad faith conduct on the part of the accused infringer, the threat of attorneys’ fees under Section 285 is “the only deterrent to the equally improper bringing of clearly unwarranted suits on invalid or unenforceable patents.” Mathis v. Spears, 857 F.2d 749, 754 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Section 285 provides:
The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorneys’
fees to the prevailing party. 35 U.S.C. § 285."I am glad that a patent troll has directly attacked one of the software giants. Now hopefully Microsoft with its deep pockets and legal team can crush this troll.
Microsoft lose in such cases surprisingly often. Smart Tags in Office, onclick activation of plugins in IE...
As much as we hate patent trolls, once and a while, there is an exception to rule which proves us all wrong.
There was a piece of DOS software in the late 80's called HyperPad which had tiles and used them to display status and launch applications. I can't find a single screenshot of it though unfortunately. I'm sure that is probably slightly "more prior" art.
I am glad that a patent troll has directly attacked one of the software giants. Now hopefully Microsoft with its deep pockets and legal team can crush this troll.
Microsoft lose in such cases surprisingly often. Smart Tags in Office, onclick activation of plugins in IE...
The Eolas case was BS though. The patent was based on rewording the description of existing technology. If memory serves me correctly. Microsofts own OCX technology was prior art for the concept. Eolas claimed that by applying their concept to the web, it was novel and non-obvious.
I think we all agree that software patents just gotta go (specially the ones regarding UI). The real question is how to make that happen. Perhaps having a big player like Microsoft targeted by a troll will help.
[1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/10/company-that-won-...
[2] http://www.inquisitr.com/112717/microsoft-loses-i4i-patent-l...
