TechShoutAdd to My AOL, MyYahoo, Google, Bloglines



Microsoft-Eolas Dispute Case re-opened by Patent Office

          0 Votes
Monday, June 4th, 2007 | Related entries: Legal, Software

Microsoft, Eolas and USPTO logos Microsoft has revealed that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has agreed to hear Microsoft’s side of the story that the Eolas browser plug-in patent was invalid. The software giant had lost a major $521 million verdict in the patent spat against Eolas. Though the verdict was in due course thrown out by an appeals court, the USPTO later upheld the validity of the Eolas patent, though only Eolas was allowed to submit evidence before that decision was zeroed onto.

The Microsoft-Eolas patent battle has been going on since 1999. In the present development of the case, Microsoft states that the USPTO will hear its argument that it, and not Eolas, is the inventor, and therefore the owner, of the browser plug-in technology in question. A five-judge panel within the USPTO will weigh evidence from both sides about the patent’s validity and ownership. Microsoft stated that the USPTO has already acknowledged that Microsoft owns an earlier if more general patent that covers the same subject as the Eolas patent.

The Eolas patent renders a description of a technique for automatically calling upon an embedded program object, which is more commonly known as a plug-in, from within a Web browser. Eolas dragged Microsoft to court on the accusation that the latter’s implementation of ActiveX plug-ins in Internet Explorer infringes on this patent. Thanks to which, Microsoft changed the way that IE handles plug-ins, causing problems to hundreds of millions of customers in the process.

Microsoft first made its prior art claim to the agency in January 2006, almost a year and a half ago. The company expects the USPTO to rule on the validity and ownership of the patent within a year.

Andy Culbert, Microsoft associate general counsel, said the company is pleased to have another opportunity to establish that it is the original inventor of the disputed technology.

Related:


Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-Spam Image

 
Web TechShout.com