Friday, August 28, 2009

"Patent litigation will be reduced to a free-for-all"?

Microsoft's appeal brief in the i4i case (which produced an injunction as to Word) states:

if the ED Texas ruling stands, "Patent litigation will be reduced to a free-for-all, unbounded by the requirements of the substantive law or the rules of evidence or trial procedure. While that mode of dispute resolution might enrich some plaintiffs and their investors, it hardly can be said to "promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts."

Elsewhere: "This case stands as a stark example of what can happen in a patent case when a judge abdicates those gatekeeping functions." Of the gatekeeper image, the Microsoft brief also stated:

And after the jury has rendered its verdict, it is the judge who, before
allowing that verdict to become an enforceable judgment, must ensure that the
verdict is adequately supported by the evidence and supportable under the law.
This gatekeeping function is especially important in patent cases because of the
delicate balance struck by patent law to achieve its objective of promoting, rather
than stifling, innovation. That balance can be lost if the district court does not
protect the process, and patent litigation then becomes a tax on innovation rather
than its guardian.

Hearing on the appeal: Sept. 23.

Dell and HP have filed amici briefs supporting Microsoft. Gavin Clarke suggests the amici are more concerned about businesses who buy computers with Word than about individuals buying single PCs: "So it looks like Dell and HP are talking more about business users who might get their PCs with Word and Office pre-installed as part of a volume purchasing agreement from the OEMs or Microsoft."

See also


DeRose, which has a priority date of July 19, 1991, is prior art under 35
U.S.C. ยง 102(e).

DeRose, 6,101,512:

This application is a divisional of application Ser. No. 08/885,578, filed Jun. 30, 1997, entitled DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING REPRESENTATION FOR AND RANDOM ACCESS RENDERING OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS, and now U.S. Pat. No. 5,983,248 which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 08/480,611 filed Jun. 7, 1995, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,644,776 which is a divisional application of Ser. No. 08/419,051 filed Apr. 7, 1995, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,557,722, which is a file-wrapper continuation of application Ser. No. 07/733,204 filed Jul. 19, 1991, abandoned.


Post a Comment

<< Home