Aussie inventor wins £260 million off Microsoft
AN AUSSIE boffin has won more than £250 million in a patent case against Microsoft, ironically over software which is designed to stop software piracy.
Ric Richardson founded of Uniloc which patented the idea of a software registrations system that allowed software makers to create try-before-you-buy versions of their work.
Under his patent users buy the software they get a registration key that unlocks the full featured version of the software.
Richardson said the Vole jacked this idea under the bonnet of its Windows XP and Office programs.
Last week, a jury found Microsoft violated the patent and told Vole to write a cheque for (US) $388 million, (£260 million) the fifth-largest patent jury award in US history.
However the fine could go much higher as the judge in the case is allowed to increase the award three-fold.
Uniloc claimed Richardson showed his software to Microsoft in 1993 but Microsoft did not license it, instead it developed an almost identical version.
The Vole insisted that its system works differently from Uniloc's and that Richardson's patent was obvious.
In 2006 a judge ruled in favour of Microsoft, but the case was overturned by an appeals court, which argued the case shouldn't have been decided without hearing from a jury.
A jury obviously decided that the Vole had nicked the idea from Richardson. Microsoft is going to appeal the decision. µ
L'INQ
AP
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Isn't this pretty much the model of shareware? Sure, the Vole may have nicked it, but I'm not sure the patent should have been granted in the first place. One would have to read the patent in full...
Off I go.
The patent is nothing like shareware, but involves keying an installation to the initial hardware. Microsoft clearly did this with Windows XP and later. Whether or not that infringes *should* be decided by a court.
mea culpa. I should have read before posting ignorant response.
Looks like they haven't got a leg to stand on then. I'm sure a very large proportion of Microsoft's own patents are 'obvious' too.
"Other inventions patented by Richardson include the ability to swap batteries on laptops without shutting down, an open standard for online forums and the 'smog eradicator' - an on-board carbon scrubber for petroleum-fuelled vehicles."
Makes me angry people can patent some of this crap - he may have a good case against muckysmurf tho...
"muckysmurf"? That's the best you can do? I think I'm going to patent a method for creating infantile 'humorous' variations of "Microsoft"... at least then I can be compensated when I read open-source nutball drivel.
In other news, the 'this crap' patents you mention are for the *means*, not the *ends*. It's easy to -want- to make a hotswap battery, and not so easy to design a way to actually do it. Patents are on the latter, not the former.
.. a mechanism for registering any old rubbish as a patent.
Naahhh ... it's been done. It's called the U.S. Patent Office.
Cheers
Are you guys serious? 'Any old rubbish as a patent?', 'Makes me angry people can patent some of this crap'. What if that was you and you didn't win and your idea was stolen? Jesus Christ guys, how about 'He won against one of the largest corporations in the world... legally.' Congratulations guy, I'm envious as hell I didn't come up with the idea. Go buy a f**king massive yacht. I would.
... which means whatever the outcome there will be another appeal?
This is retarder. I hope microsoft fights this.
Also, so much shareware uses that method, and if they ewin this imagine how many other companies they can sue?
Anyways Micrsofts solutions works on a total different level and in a different way then this crappy patent.
This is like comparing apples to oranges.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=K [...] _1#PPA3,M1
look at only sheet 1 to 6. (sheet 7+ is a special cdrom unit with a device in it for security.)
I looked at the patent and it is invalid. It does not apply to microsoft. And I tell you why.
The patent states making a fingerprint on the user environment.
Microsoft windows uses the hardware to make a fingerprint. Also an installation ID is generated when windows is installed based on that.
Windows can detect when hardware change occures so its very advanced.
To register windows, you need the installation ID, and product key.
And they give back a code to verify windows is activated. Also if this 'fingerprint' changes in any way in the future, then reactivation is needed. We can call this fingerprint a system hash. Installation id only changes when you force to change the product key.
THe system that the other guys have is: generate a fingerprint on the user environment, give you a serial number based on that. THe serial # also relies on the registeration details. you phone in and give the serial number, and they give you back a registeration key to unlock the software. THey require your registeation info inorder to generate a key. You use key in your software to unlock it. In a way you are kind of forced to reqister. As your registeration info is key for this system to work. (its needed on both ends).
Also when program starts, it checks each time if registeration key details matches user enviroment (fingerprint) using some method in order to run properly in full mode. THis system seems to be pretty much a one time deal thing as their is no product code.
What heppens when you need to reinstall?
Microsoft system is totally different.
Microsoft system does not require you to register your user information or credit card details etc.
An installation key is generated on install. Both this installation key and product key are given to Microsoft.
Reinstallation is possible as microsoft system relies on a product key.
Also a product key is resposable for unlocking different version level (basic, pro, ultimate) with the same software.
So you can see Microsoft system and the other guys system are totally different.
WHen the other guys system came out, you couldn't really detect hardware so the other guys system never was able to do this. THe other guys system ran under dos or old windows 3.11 etc so it was limited on the user environment.
Microsofts system is advanced in how it detect hardware, drivers, hardware chances, uniqued Ids on the processor, hardware serial numbers etc. Most of these techniques used are new generation compared to the good old days as things were no so developed back then.
THe other guys did not try to include room for the future in their patent and advanced techniques.
WHat can I say Windows is an OS, their product is for an application that runs under windows. THeir application doesn't see what windows sees.
Also for microsofts other products such as windows, well, they tie into each other. As soon as hardware chancgs my Microsoft office needs to be reactivated.
That even Microsoft will eventually understand what a damned rubbish software patents are.
Perhaps I am a bit optimistic, hovewer.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=K7MoAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1_1#PPA3,M1
this is the link to the picture of the stupid patent
Mr. Irving for your in depth analysis of the two different systems. I will have to disagree with your conclusion -sounds like the exact same thing to me.
And here are a couple of patents of my own:
The teleporter
a device that dissambles matter in one location and sends the information as data to antother location that reassambles.
There. I now own all future teleportation technology.
The faster than light driv
a device that folds space letting a spacecraft power itself using regular enginepower through a tunnel of warped space effectively propelling the spacecraft faster than light. I call it: the warp drive.
I now own all future FTL drives based on space/time warping.
Antigravity
A device that can create or remove gravity locally by sending out an inverse gravity pattern of what gravity is present, then modulating the pattern to establish the new and desired gravity.
-Power requirement is awfully high.
And now I own antigravity.
I shouldn't need to remind anyone of a certain company with a fourletter name beginning with S who make a somewhat popular gameconsole patented a mind/machine interface using no more complex language than I just did and without any description of the actutal technology. The current patent system is holding innovation back and must be dismantled.
1)A product activated once installed using there system, can only monitor so many environment varables. As there system runs under an OS.
2)Their system does not use a product key
3)There system requires you to reister the product with the company using the exact same info typed in the program. As there user input is key in the encryption. In the case of the internet I guess this information could be transfered to company. Also credit card/billing info is required
4) microsofts system does not require reisteration
5) microsofts system uses a product key as well as installation id
6) micrsofts system generates a footprint bases on hardware or hardware changes etc.
7) Microsofts installation id doesnt change everytime it has to be reactivated.
8) microsofts solution is perrnament as it uses a product key in its activation. the other solution looks to be temporary.
Since I am a programmer. ANd I have created an OS before (although no where advanced as windows), I know from a programming standpoint the implementation of each system would be different.
I agree there is some similaries between the two systems, but its like comparing running shoes to dress shoes.
If Microsoft baught this patent it would in no way help them to derive a system needed that would be how microsofts one is today.
Imagine finding a penny on the floor, and you put 99 of your own with it and to buy something at the store. But to find out that just becuase you used that penny with 99 of your own, you owe 100 pennies or possibly 300 pennies (with tripple damages).
WHat I am saying is this is a really extream amount of money for something so small in microsofts system if they are similar.
@ Perisoft
"muckysmurf"? That's the best you can do?
Wasn't me mate, and its more of a term of endearment. But go ahead and insult open sourcers, although I have no idea what that has to do with anything.
In other news, the 'this crap' patents you mention are for the *means*, not the *ends*.
If that was the case that would be awesome and I would have no problem with the patent system.
It's easy to -want- to make a hotswap battery, and not so easy to design a way to actually do it. Patents are on the latter, not the former.
right so he has made some yeah? Has a big factory pumping them out does he? Or has he just had a bit of an think about and patented his scribblings on the off chance he can make some money/fame later on - in the meantime needlessly restricting genuine innovators?
Patent apologists are hilarious