RSSMicrosoft Refrains from Changing IE for Eolas Patent
By David Worthington | Published January 30, 2004, 5:06 AM
Yet another twist is unfolding in the ongoing Eolas patent saga. Microsoft has announced that it will forego altering its Internet Explorer Web browser until an appeals court resolves whether or not to uphold a district court's final ruling on the case.
Eolas holds exclusive rights to a University of California patent over a mechanism that is used by developers to embed and invoke interactive programs such as an ActiveX control into Web browsers.
Much controversy surrounds the patent, which is currently under review by the United States Patent and Trademark Office at the insistence of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). The W3C claims that prior art predates the 1994 patent, rendering it invalid.
Early HTML specification drafts authored by W3C head Tim Berners-Lee and staffer Dave Raggett potentially fit into the category of prior art.
Last November, Microsoft alerted partners and foes alike of its intention to modify Windows and Internet Explorer to sidestep a $521 million verdict handed down in August, 2003. Specialized instructions were supplied to developers who stand to have untold numbers of Web sites and applications "broken" by any implementation of the court's injunction, according to Redmond officials.
A short list of affected software includes: Macromedia Flash, Apple QuickTime, RealNetworks RealOne Player, Adobe Acrobat Reader, Sun Java Virtual Machine, and Microsoft's Windows Media Player.
Developers affected by the ruling can take a collective sigh of relief - for now. The district court has stayed the injunction until an appeal is heard.
Due to the circumstances surrounding the validity of the patent and feedback it has received from industry partners, Microsoft has decided not to release a patch for Internet Explorer or change the upcoming Windows XP Service Pack 2 at this time.
I really hope Eolas get exactly what they deserve from persuing this contemptable effort at making some big money fast; absolutely nothing.
Whilst I appreciate that MSIE isn't the only choice for browsing the web, assuming Eolas win their case they could develop "a taste for blood" which might spur them on to going after as many other browser developers as possible.
It's difficult to see whether or not Eolas have considered the damage a victory would cause to the Internet community at large; assuming they did win and were to persue cases against e.g. Apple Computer (for their excellent Safari browser) or the Mozilla Foundation (with regards to the Mozilla Suite as well as the stand alone browser Firebird), I doubt very much that these two groups would have enough in the bank to pay up and still remain operational.
Let's hope that "prior art" (and a generous helping of common sense) saves the day.
Score: 0
|i dont really know what all of this means. i think it means microsoft is trying to stop those stupid dialoges that ask if they can install stupid stuff on your computer like the comet cursors and things, that appear in advertisements. if this is the case, why doesnt microsoft just get rid of activex all together, and find a new way to interact all of those flash and quicktime in different ways? microsoft has way to much money and power to be trying to sue a university. im sure they could figure out a new way to make things work. they might not be smart enough, but they are rich enough
Score: 0
|This matter should have just been left in the courts itself, and not in the Patent Office. It only seems fair to say that the Patent Office is bending to the wishes of big businesses. Now, I do understand the reasons behind protecting Microsoft and etc., however, doing so would solidify that a large business can push a government office into doing whatever. Some may argue that it is Eolas's fault, and in a way it is. Yet, it's also the fault of Microsoft and etc. as well for not knowing this from the beginning.
Score: 0
|mynameisdougb you have completely missed the point on this one. It has nothing to do with Comet Cursor etc.. It has everything to do with your browsing experience.
If MS lose their update to IE will prevent external technologies from being run directly from the code in the web page.
Open this page in a new browser window: www.timberlink.co.uk/viewer.htm . - a simple gallery page. Not too technical, but, as it loaded it ran five JavaScript instructions; one to stop the page loading in another site's frame, the gallery, the scrolling task bar message, the menu and a tracker. The IE update will cause a warning box to appear as each ellement tries to load and you will have to "Ok" each one for the page to load. If a simple page has five elements embeded in the code imagine what some more complex pages will have.
Micrsoft are not suing the university. Eolas Systems (a one man corporation) and the university claim to hold the patent for embeded technologies. They are suing Microsoft! Fortunately, other organisations have come to Microsofts defense with evidence the the technology was in use prior to the issue of the patent. The US Patent Office have agreed to look again at the patent with a view to invalidating it if they agree with the evidence. If MS lose, the way you browse the Net will change dramatically until site designers can rewrite their code - a massive task. And don't think you can just change browser. If they get MS, Mozilla and the rest will be next on the list.
Score: 0
|