MIcrosoft vs i4i and Software Patents

[Dr. C]

This case is going all the way to the US Supreme Court and can have a profound impact on patents in the US. i4i is claiming patent infringement by Microsoft.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2011/04/18/tech-i4i-microsoft-supreme-court.html
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/032111-microsoft-i4i-patent.html?hpg1=bn

Microsoft has many supporters in this case including the EFF and many in the FLOSS communities

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/microsoft-v-i4i-limited-partnership/

[3Miro]

Now, what are the chances of this leading to the abolition of the insane software patents?

[LowSky]

Now, what are the chances of this leading to the abolition of the insane software patents?

Slim to none. In the business sense no company would like to see the end of software patents. Its bad enough that corporations are seen as people in the US. Whatever decision is made by the Court will most likely be conservative if you can use any of the past few years as a guide. Don't expect miracles from that crowd.

[Dr. C]

Slim to none. In the business sense no company would like to see the end of software patents. Its bad enough that corporations are seen as people in the US. Whatever decision is made by the Court will most likely be conservative if you can use any of the past few years as a guide. Don't expect miracles from that crowd.

If the US Supreme Court rules in favor of Microsoft it will significantly weaken software patents. As to whether big business in in favor of iffy software patents there are some very large corporations supporting Microsoft's position here. As if Microsoft itself is not a large corporation on its own right.

[LowSky]

Microsoft winning will significantly weaken many of there own software patents.

In my own head Microsoft ends up in a Lose-Lose scenario.

[beew]

Finally a taste of its own medicine. Poetic justice. The beauty is either way MS loses.

[Aquix]

"i4i is not a so-called patent troll, meaning that the company didn't buy the patent in order to shake down others for infringing on it. The company's current CEO, Michel Vulpe, and Stephen Owens filed for the patent in 1994 and it was awarded in 1998 (patent No. 5,787,449). It covers a process that makes it possible for computer users to use regular word processors as XML/SGML editors. On the other hand, just because i4i came by this patent in earnest, doesn't mean it isn't the kind of "bad" software patent that has turned software patents into a mockery."

No it's not a bad patent at all. It was in all honesty in earnest. This is the problem, and they are by following this in court, by definition patent trolls.

I'm not against all software patents. What I'm against is generic software patents. I know Stallmans point of view and I agree with a lot of it. But if you build software that is unique, and it might be open, you should get a patent for it. There is a difference between facebook's code and a 4 line bash script, but both should be able to call generic code. But one should be able to get a patent for it's work and thats the one with exclusive code.

The balance is to allow innovation or kill it , by the patents, and for the patents.