Login:
Password:

Microsoft to Modify ActiveX in IE Update

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

December 5, 2005, 12:45 PM

In order to avoid infringing on a controversial patent that it has been struggling to battle in court, Microsoft has decided to change the way Internet Explorer loads embedded ActiveX controls. An update for IE will be rolled out early next year, the company says.

The patent involving the mechanisms used to embed interactive programs in a Web browser is owned by Eolas Technology and backed by the University of California. Eolas successfully sued Microsoft in 2003 alleging IE's plug-in architecture infringed on its patent and was awarded $521 million in damages, which has ballooned to $560 million due to interest.

In response, Microsoft said it would alter how the browser implemented ActiveX, but later backed away from the switch. Software affected by the patent would include Macromedia Flash, QuickTime, RealOne Player, Acrobat Reader, Sun's Java Virtual Machine, and Windows Media Player among other applications that embed into Web pages.

But following two legal setbacks in its efforts to invalidate the Eolas patent and have the ruling appealed, Microsoft is revisiting that change. In September, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office upheld the patent despite claims of prior art.

In late October, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal regarding the damages awarded to Eolas. Microsoft says the amount was calculated using worldwide sales of Windows, rather than just those copies sold in the United States where Eolas' patent is enforced.

Microsoft is still planning to appeal the verdict on another legal front, but has opted not to wait for that outcome before changing ActiveX. With Windows Vista set to be "feature complete" by the end of December, Microsoft may have simply run out of time.

The company posted a notice on the MSDN Web site detailing the planned update, along with technical information for developers.

"After a forthcoming update, Microsoft Internet Explorer users will not be able to directly interact with Microsoft ActiveX controls loaded by the APPLET, EMBED, or OBJECT elements," the notice reads. "Users will be able to interact with such controls after activating their user interfaces."

Specifically, ActiveX controls will no longer be activated by default. This means users must first click on the control before it will recognize any input. However, Microsoft has posted instructions on how developers can bypass this restriction through the use of external scripts.

ActiveX controls that do not require interaction will continue to perform as they always have, Microsoft says. The change will likely have little effect on end-users, but may require minor updates to accessibility software that must now recognize an activate controls before taking action.

The update will cover Internet Explorer on Windows 2000, XP and Windows Server 2003. Internet Explorer 7 and Windows Vista will also include the change.

Add a Comment (19 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By TheBeastH6

edited Dec 5, 2005 - 6:58 PM

And it bahwooned to $560 million due to intewest wates. Stoopid internets.

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 3:34 PM

Is there anything [good] Microsoft has developed on its on? And, why does it always seem to want its cake and eat it, too? It threatens and/or sues the d***ens out of everyone who even looks over at Microsoft, but then resists every attempt by other entities to protect their own intellectual property. Now that is true greed.

Score: 0

By VikingBlade

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 3:51 PM

Actually this is one of the times you want Microsoft to win. Read what the Eolas patent actually covers. (though I admit Eolas probably won't go after anyone else such as Mozilla, Opera, or Apple since they already got what they wanted, money ... well they might go after Apple, they have money)

Score: 0

By JacenSolo

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 8:51 PM

Just a question... What DOES the Eolas patent cover?

BTW, I don't see how Microsoft is in the wrong here either.

Score: 0

By THZGryphon

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 7:20 PM

Of course he didn't read it. It is the obligatory bash MS no matter what the story is about post.

Score: 0

By ryusen

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 5:36 PM

Agreed. MS hypocracy aside, this is a stupidly broad patent and possibly one of the worst cases of patent abuse (IMHO).

Score: 0

By Jedite

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 1:23 PM

Yet another example as to why the Patent system in the US has to be revised. There are just too many of these so called patent claims that are just wrong. Has Eolas even used this patent? What good is a patent on something if all you have is a patent and nothing to show for it?

Score: 1

By itanshi

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 2:18 PM

easy to say, but having rhe option to accept active x instead of it being automatic sounds like a security feature people like us have b****ed about for a long time

i think eulas did what FF has not ^^ hehe

Score: 0

By Scipio

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 1:13 PM

This sucks. You would think that paying out half a billion for a questionable claim would be enough to settle the deal. If MS changes the way it loads ActiveX, then Eolas will get no more money anyway, because who on earth would go to them if Microsoft doesn't?

Greed, greed, and more greed, which means that every computer, website, and program using ActiveX will have to be fiddled with and upgraded.

Score: 0

By ogman

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 1:35 PM

Makes me really glad I don't use it!

Score: 0

By templarâ„¢

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 9:05 PM

I'm not so sure abt that. It seems to affect Java applets and other embedded objects as well.

Score: 0

By AntiochMedia

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 12:58 PM

From what I understand, this is not about ActiveX, but rather about how ActiveX loads embedded controls. If the verbage in this article and all articles preceeding this is correct -- then I have to side with Microsoft (for once in my life) that this is ridiculous and hurts the Internet Community as almost every website integrates content such as Flash, etc.

As a developer, I'm not looking forward to the updated version of IE being deployed as I can see myself jumping from site to site adding in safe guards so that people will not be calling me about why these things don't work.

I still can't help but believe though that this article and others available on the net do very little to properly explain the problem and/or the solution.

A few discussions -- #1, could this help to level the playing field for Opera and/or Firefox as ActiveX was one of the few proprietary differences from IE and every one else.

#2, could this result in standardization of embedding content (flash, etc.) in web pages based on W3C specs -- APPLET over embed and object.

And is the way that Firefox and Opera currently interpret APPLET/EMBED commands by prompting for the correct plug-in an example of how MS should look to do this in IE7?

Score: 0

By cupsdell

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 2:36 PM

The Eolas patent does not cover ActiveX only. It covers any embedded object in a web page where "some of the object's data are external to the page, and where there is a control path to the object's implementation to support user interaction".

Eolas has chosen to go after Microsoft up to now, but it could also go after Apple, Mozilla, Opera, iCab, etc., etc., etc.

Score: 0

By Babylon2x

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 4:06 PM

This is one of these times I actually feel sorry for Microsoft. If they can go after Apple, Mozilla, Opera, etc, then why don't they? Just because they need money and Microsoft is the biggest target? Way to screw up the internet for people Eolas. What a bunch of a******s. The patent system is completely ridiculous, and the courts must be completely out of their mind. When will common sense ever prevail? It seems like never would be the answer to that question.

Unless they go after another company aside from Microsoft, it solidly proves how greed driven these people are. It's not about upholding a patent, it's just who can give them the biggest check.

Score: 0

By Kramy

edited Dec 5, 2005 - 4:27 PM

But they also went after the company with the product with the largest number of exploits and security holes in it.

Edit: Out of those that use that type of technology. I recently broke my Quicktime somehow, so now it won't load in FireFox. :P

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 3:49 PM

Yeah, people tend to ignore/overlook that fact frequently...

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 12:54 PM

Future conversations between Microsoft and Eolas:

"Knock Knock!"
"Who's there?"
"Sssssssshhhhh!!!"
"Ssssshhhh!!! Even BEFORE you start! That was a pre-emptive Ssssshhhhh! Just know I have a whole bag of Sssssssshhh with your name on it!"

Score: 0

By TwinsDad

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 1:58 PM

Would that be a big bag full that is set on fire on the door step?

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Dec 5, 2005 - 3:50 PM

Of course!

Score: 0