Time for sharp competitive intelligence

Posts tagged ‘microsoft’

Is Microsoft Aging?

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

Patent Lawsuit a Safe Route to Revenue Generation During Recession

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:

  1. Aloft Media, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
  2. Performance Pricing, Inc. v. Google Inc. et al
  3. Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc.
  4. Actus, LLC v. Bank of America Corp. et al
  5. Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al
  6. ESN LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al
  7. Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc
  8. Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
  9. Northeastern University et al v. Google, Inc.,
  10. Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
  11. Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al
  12. Aloft Media, LLC v. Google, Inc.
  13. GraphOn Corporation v. Google Inc.
  14. Google, Inc. v. EMSAT Advanced Geo-Location Technology, LLC et al
  15. Picsel (Research) Ltd. et al v. Apple Inc.
  16. Web Tracking Solutions, Inc. et al v. Google, Inc.
  17. Association For Molecular Pathology et al v. United States Patent and Trademark Office et al
  18. Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al
  19. Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al
  20. Certicom Corporation et al v. Sony Corporation et al
  21. Klausner Technologies Inc v. Verizon Wireless et al
  22. Clark v. The Walt Disney Company et al
  23. HYPERPHRASE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. GOOGLE INC.
  24. BabyAge..com, Inc. v. Leachco, Inc.
  25. IP Innovation LLC et al v. Google, Inc.
  26. Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.
  27. Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al
  28. Soilworks LLC v Midwest Industrial Supply Inc
  29. Priest et al v Google Inc.
  30. 21 srl v. Apple Inc. et al
  31. PACid Group, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al
  32. Accolade Systems LLC v. Micron Technology Inc et al
  33. Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
  34. Clear With Computers, LLC v. Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. et al
  35. Motorola Inc v. Research In Motion Limited et al

Free Microsoft Antivirus “Morro” And Immediate Impact

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

Apple Settles iPod Patent with Burst

Apple agreed to settle a patent dispute with Burst.com, ending two years of litigation. Burst agreed not to sue Apple over current or pending DVR patents.

Under the agreement, Apple will pay Burst.com $10 million and get access to Burst.com’s patent portfolio, with some exceptions. Apple won’t have access to four of Burst.com’s current and pending patents, including three pending patents relating to digital video recorder (DVR) technology. Court costs, expenses and attorney’s fees will reduce the proceeds to Burst.com to $4.6 million.

Burst alleges that Apple infringed four patents for transmission of compressed audio and video files in iTunes, iLife, QuickTime and the iPod.

Apple was asked by Burst in 2004 to license some of its patents, saying they were at the pioneering heart of the iPod. In January 2006, Apple sued Burst.com in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking a judgment that the Burst.com patents were invalid and not infringed upon. Burst.com countersued in April 2006, alleging that Apple infringed four of its patents.

Bust also won a $60 million financial settlement from Microsoft in 2005 after a patent dispute over the transmission of music and video with its Windows Media Player.

Nintendo Loses Patent Lawsuit

Anascape Inc., a small East Texas-based gaming company, sued Microsoft and Nintendo in 2006 for being in breach of no less than twelve of their controller patents. Filed in 2000, these patents include “Remote Controller with Analog Button”, “3D Controller With Vibration” and “Game Controller with Analog Pressure Sensor”.

Late Wednesday, a federal jury found Nintendo infringed upon Anascape’s patents while designing their GameCube, Wavebird, and Wii Classic controllers. Nintendo is being ordered to pay Anascape $21 Million USD for patent infringement.

Microsoft’s out-of-court settlement with Anascape before the Nintendo trial began is considered confidential, and no further information is available.

Jury Orders Microsoft to Pay Alcatel-Lucent $367 Million

A jury in San Diego ordered Microsoft to pay Alcatel-Lucent US$367.4 million for infringing on two patents, adding a new chapter to a long-running dispute between the companies.
The jury, in U.S. District Court in San Diego, found that Microsoft had infringed on two patents involving user interface technology. It also found that Microsoft didn’t infringe on another Alcatel-Lucent patent related to video decoding. The court ruled that patent, which Alcatel-Lucent alleged was infringed in MPEG2-based DVD playback in Windows, is invalid.
According to Microsoft, which will try to overturn the infringement verdict, Alcatel-Lucent had hoped to receive $1.75 billion in damages. Microsoft called the video patent ruling a victory for the many companies that use MPEG video-decoding technology.

The case dates back to 2003, when Alcatel-Lucent charged Microsoft, Dell and Gateway with patent infringement.

Last year, a court reversed a $1.5 billion patent infringement case against Microsoft in a case Alcatel-Lucent brought against the software giant related to MP3 technology.

There’s more to come in the ongoing battle between the companies. On April 22, the San Diego court will hear a case Microsoft is bringing against Alcatel-Lucent, accusing it of infringing on nine patents.

Tag Cloud