RSSFirst Linux Patent Infringement Suit Comes from Familiar Plaintiff
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published October 12, 2007, 5:59 PM
Just days ago, Red Hat publicly responded to a very thinly veiled threat from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that its Enterprise Linux users might eventually owe Microsoft some money by posting, "We are also aware of no patent lawsuit against Linux. Ever. Anywhere." Today, the company learned one was actually being filed against both it and Novell in the patent trial capital of America: Marshall, Texas.
The plaintiff is a familiar one: IP Innovation, LLC, the very same company that filed an infringement suit against Apple last April. The subject is also the very same patent: an old Xerox PARC filing renewed in 1991, #5,072,412, for "User interface with multiple workspaces for sharing display system objects."
[Editor's Note: IP Innovation, LLC is not to be confused with IP Innovations, LLC (plural), a patent search services firm for prospective patent filers, based in Washington, DC.]
As with the Apple case, the complaint in this new case appears to have been compiled using software, in some cases apparently using fill-in-the-blank fields whose entries are occasionally misspelled. It makes no argument other than Red Hat and Novell selling operating systems whose operating characteristics allegedly intentionally infringing upon the plaintiff's IP.
It may perhaps be among the most uninteresting filings ever submitted in Marshall court, but what could become interesting -- assuming this case ever reaches trial -- is the defense. If someone were to have a legitimate claim to intellectual property that appears in various distributions of Linux, then does the mere distribution of that IP constitute infringement? Would it be willful infringement, especially considering the openly shared positions of proponents of free software - or, more to the point, could someone make the case that it is willful infringement, enough to convince seven out of twelve jurors?
How would Linux distributors legitimately defend the IP integrity of their product? Would they risk their reputations by guaranteeing to a court that Linux' contents absolutely violate no one else's portfolios, at least not intentionally? Or would they instead defer responsibility to the open source community that created the work, by stating they take the community at its word?
If defendants opt for the latter course of action, the burden of proof could end up on the developers' shoulders after all.
Which is why Novell's and Red Hat's response could be of considerable importance not just to Linux distributors but to Microsoft, which apparently intends to maintain its public stance that users of at least non-Novell distributions of Linux may one day find themselves liable. If IP Innovation's contention goes down to defeat, it could save Microsoft a world of trouble and negative scrutiny later.
But if it has legs, Microsoft could be taking notes, and could make use of what it discovers later. So those who suspect Microsoft may be directly involved in this case - even though it involves its new partner in covenant, Novell - may come to realize Microsoft may best benefit for now by staying on the sidelines.
"Editor's Note: IP Innovation, LLC is not to be confused with IP Innovations, LLC (plural), a patent search services firm for prospective patent filers, based in Washington, DC."
Why doesn't IP Innovations sue them? That would be hilariously appropriate, I think :D
Score: 0
|First off - this is not a LINUX patent case. This has nothing to do with Linux and everything to do with X-Windows/KDE/GNOME/etc, which runs on a lot more than just Linux - under Cygwin in Windows, Mac, and most any Unix. So please, stop calling it a Linux case.
Second, whilst Novell & Red Hat would likely stand up for the groups - they should be suing FSF (GNOME), KDE, X-org, etc. instead. However, some of those entities are in countries that don't allow patents.
Summary - this is NOT a Linux patent infringement issue. Linux still does not infringe on a patent.
Score: 0
|I believe both Novell and Red Hat have developers working with either or both GNOME and KDE.
Wasn't the original dev of enlightement a Red Hat Employee (maybe still is??)?
I agree the headline is a little off, but the suit is arguably heading for the right folks.
What remains to be seen is the validity of the patent, which is probably crap. :)
Score: 0
|Still another IT Innovation at the bottom.
Score: 0
|It is IP Innovation, LLC not IT Innovation, LLC.
Score: 0
|What a load of garbage. Seems like the lazy are trying to leach off the innovative, yet again.
When is Texas going to learn that their rules for claims are too lax. They should get up off their asses and do some homework before accepting these stupid claims. Fat lawyers, fat judges making fortunes for nothing.
Score: 0
|Where's DaveBG? His avatar over at blu-ray.com is the linux penguin, yet he's nowhere to be found.
Anyone who loves linux so much ould be in here throwing a fit. Apparently he's completely full of s***.
Score: -1
|I'm getting really fed up of these technology patent parlor games. Many of the patent suits I've seen lately is over processes and programming techniques that people have been using for years both professionally and at home. It looks like an extended game of shadowboxing to me with the end user paying the costs. I wish I could get a patent on the process of breathing through the nose. I could rake in billions in royalties every minute then.
Score: 0
|IP Innovation LLC is a subsidiary of Acacia.
There's an interesting write up of this lawsuit including a few interesting links (including the one to the patent and one to the complaint of course).
http://www.groklaw.net/a...story=20071011205044141
Score: 0
|Wouldn't Microsoft Windows also fall under this as an infringing product?
Edit:
IANAL, but it looks like after reading the patent, that it's talking about recycling windows (back/next) etc
Also please note the date of the patent, and the fact that it's probably outside the statute of limitations (6 years) of the patent for suing for infringement.
It'll get thrown out, you watch.
Score: 0
|Thank you for doing the work the lazy journalist above didn't do.
Score: 0
|would MS fall under infringement? more then likely. (not an MS hateboy here) but people like their money. MS is money. Bill Gates draws breathe and therefor pays taxes and being the second riches person in the world a lot of them. so the question remains, why would any government body be interested in hurting their pay checks? Same with all large tax producing companies.
Score: 0
|retarded.
Score: 0
|huh what is MS scared of now?
Score: 0
|... did you simply read the last paragraph to craft that revolutionary question?
has nothing to do with mircosoft being scared of anyone.
simply says if IT Innovation is successful in a patent infringemnt case against linux distributors then it is more likely that mircosoft could be as well. and vice versa if they are shotdown in a fiery fashion microsoft may not attempt a lawsuit at all.
Score: 0
|Which is still retarded....
Score: 0
|the suit from it innovations is retarded yes..
the 'pending' suit for from mircosoft is retard yes...
his statement was a shot in the dark of what the article meant.. yes.
Score: 0
|