Recently, U.S. state of Mississippi settled an antitrust suit with Microsoft Corp for $100 million on Thursday and said businesses, individuals, schools and local government were eligible for a share of the money. Apart from antitrust suit Microsoft was also ordered to pay $521 million to Eolas Technologies, $200 million to a Canadian software firm i4i Ltd and much more to many more companies for patent infringment and offcourse these are all lost battles by Microsoft. Here is the current list of all patent under litigation.
- US5369702 – TECSEC Incorporated – Distributed cryptographic object method
- US6374289 – Backweb Technologies, Ltd. – Distributed client-based data caching system
- US6542814 – Horizon Navigation, Inc. – Methods and apparatus for dynamic point of interest display
- US6195662 – Juxtacomm Technologies Inc. – System for transforming and exchanging data between distributed heterogeneous computer systems
- US6405368 – Method for separate compilation of templates
- US7496854 – Arendi Holding Limited – Method, system and computer readable medium for addressing handling from a computer program
- US6405368 – Method for separate compilation of templates
- US7363592 – Tool group manipulations
The objective and target of any organization is growth at 45 degree on x & Y axis through best products, best services etc… with latest innovations. Ever since recession has hit the western market the economy and jobs are melting like never before, chapter 11 filing cases are increasing. After all to run an organization revenue has to be generated. As newspapers across North America and the globe continue to flood with stories of economic downturn and businesses fighting to survive, organizations this month are placing a renewed focus on innovation and revenue generation.
Revenue generation through patent lawsuits is the new trend. 35 patent lawsuits have been filed just in 5 plus month time during 2009, wonder how many more are there. Surely first half of 2009 is not good for Google in terms of lawsuits, total 14 lawsuit are been battled.
Lawsuit filing cases of 2009:
- Aloft Media, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
- Performance Pricing, Inc. v. Google Inc. et al
- Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc.
- Actus, LLC v. Bank of America Corp. et al
- Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al
- ESN LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al
- Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc
- Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
- Northeastern University et al v. Google, Inc.,
- Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
- Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al
- Aloft Media, LLC v. Google, Inc.
- GraphOn Corporation v. Google Inc.
- Google, Inc. v. EMSAT Advanced Geo-Location Technology, LLC et al
- Picsel (Research) Ltd. et al v. Apple Inc.
- Web Tracking Solutions, Inc. et al v. Google, Inc.
- Association For Molecular Pathology et al v. United States Patent and Trademark Office et al
- Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al
- Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al
- Certicom Corporation et al v. Sony Corporation et al
- Klausner Technologies Inc v. Verizon Wireless et al
- Clark v. The Walt Disney Company et al
- HYPERPHRASE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. GOOGLE INC.
- BabyAge..com, Inc. v. Leachco, Inc.
- IP Innovation LLC et al v. Google, Inc.
- Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.
- Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al
- Soilworks LLC v Midwest Industrial Supply Inc
- Priest et al v Google Inc.
- 21 srl v. Apple Inc. et al
- PACid Group, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al
- Accolade Systems LLC v. Micron Technology Inc et al
- Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
- Clear With Computers, LLC v. Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. et al
- Motorola Inc v. Research In Motion Limited et al
Finally the Bilski case has gone to US Supreme Court. “Not since 1981 has the Supreme Court undertaken to spell out the kinds of inventions that are eligible for patent rights — that is, the right to produce or use an invented device or process, or to license it to others for royalties. Much has changed since the Court’s decision in Diamond v. Diehr in 1981, not least the digital revolution.”
A study was conducted on the effect of Biliski in various technology patents by an IP, technology and market research company called Dolcera.
Detailed report and statistics have been published at Dolcera Public Reports
The below chart depicts the effect of Biliski on various technology domains.
Today’s headline on yahoo news: “Microsoft will soon unveil free anti-virus software“.
Immediate Market Impact: Symantetc shares fell 0.5 percent on Nasdaq and McAfee fell 1.3 percent on the New York Stock Exchange, while Microsoft was up 2.1 percent. The Nasdaq composite index was down 0.47 percent.
Investors Reaction: Investors are closely monitoring the free service, code-named Morro after Brazil’s Morro de Sao Paolo beach, amid concern it could hurt sales of products from Symantec and McAfee, which generate billions of dollars of revenue a year protecting Windows PCs from attacks by hackers.
Competitors Reaction: Officials with Symantec and McAfee have said they do not see Morro as a threat.
Analyst Reaction: “It’s a long-term competitive threat,” said Daniel Ives, an analyst with FBR Capital Markets, though he added that the near-term impact was minimal.
Is Microsoft attempting to challenge commercial antivirus makers just like OpenOffice.org challenged Microsoft?
Maybe microsoft is planning to make morro an integral part of its OS for future sales strategy. The reason behind comment is below:
The reason that today’s computers and today’s computer networks are so easily infected stems back to a decision made at Microsoft, for marketing reasons.
In other words, we’re all being screwed by Microsoft Marketing. Let me explain. Read full story….
Source: Yahoo news and bnet.com
Wonder how many of us have missed this peace of delightful information like me, though the news is not new but worth knowing about…
Yahoo! Inc. has been granted the Indian Trademark Office’s first ever sound mark registration.
INTA’s Indian representative, Simran Daryanani, has supported the move, saying: “We are extremely excited to learn that the Indian Trademark Office has recognized an audible iteration of intellectual property and granted it protected status as a sound mark.” He went on to comment:: “India has a thriving economy, and its resourceful and hardworking people are developing new products and services everyday, and we hope that this is only the first in a long list of new protections for Indian brand owners.”
In a statement, INTA acknowledged the commitment and leadership in intellectual property protection of the Indian Trademark Office, and said that the decision indicated that sound marks are now being considered as meaningful as word marks.