RSSMobile E-mail Firm Visto Sues Microsoft
By Ed Oswald | Published December 15, 2005, 12:40 PM
UPDATED Just one day after it signed a licensing agreement with RIM rival NTP, wireless e-mail technology maker Visto announced on Thursday that it had filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft. The suit claims that Windows Mobile 5.0 is a "blatant infringement" on Visto technology.
Microsoft told BetaNews Wednesday that while it could not comment on the suit as the company had not yet reviewed the complaint, it wished "to underscore that Microsoft stands behind its products and respects the intellectual property rights of others."
At issue is the method Windows Mobile 5.0 uses in order to synchronize mobile data and e-mail with an Exchange server.
Specifically, Visto has accused Microsoft of infringing on three patents, including the system and methods to securely synchronize copies of a workspace element in a network, to access this data from a computer network, and the system and method to use a data manager to access, manipulate and synchronize this data.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court in Marshall, Texas, seeks an injunction to prevent Microsoft from further infringement on Visto's patents, and seeks unspecified monetary damages.
Visto CEO Brian Bogosian says this isn't the first time Microsoft has attempted to appropriate another company's technology and sell it as its own, pointing to cases involving Sun, AT&T and Burst.com.
"Microsoft has a long and sordid history when it comes to competing in the marketplace," he told reporters in a conference call announcing the suit Thursday afternoon.
Visto says it has been developing the technologies Microsoft illegally used in Windows Mobile 5.0 for nearly a decade. While Bogosian acknowledged that the rest of the industry had caught up to the company's work, there are companies that are not properly licensing Visto's technology.
"They claim it is an innovation. It is not," he said. "We are prepared to defend what is ours." Bogosian declined to comment whether or not Visto had its sights on any other companies that could potentially be infringing on the company's patents.
Microsoft was not contacted before the suit was filed, Bogosian admitted when questioned by BetaNews during the conference call. However, he argued the company had its reasons not to approach Redmond first.
"It was very clear to us that they knew about this. Their blatant disregard for our intellectual property, we felt it was very black and white," he said. "We also felt based on their past track record they likely wouldn't take any of our claims very seriously."
Bogosian also raised the specters of Netscape and RealNetworks as examples of Microsoft's tactics to bully competitors out of the market, arguing courts had repeatedly sided against the software giant.
"They are a big, powerful, wealthy company, but they have no real growth, even in their most profitable divisions," Bogosian chided. "They want to show investors that they can sustain growth in a new, developing market, like mobile access to email and data, but they cannot be permitted to do that by misappropriating another company's intellectual property."
The third to last paragraph is going to cause Visto a lot of pain in court. They should have filed their motion and shut up after that. Their own rhetoric is going to end up being their biggest enemy later on. If they filed in Mass, it wouldn't be as big of an issue, but in Texas things are different.
Score: 0
|Citing previous behaviour is not necessarily a fair way to attack the defendant (i.e. Microsoft).
Microsoft may well have a history of this kind of behaviour, but it is a huge company that does deals every minute of the day. Highlighting a few of them that fit your case hardly seems representative.
The law on "previous bad character" has recently changed here in the UK, so that the defendant's criminal past can be revealed to the court to establish a pattern of such behaviour. I think this has followed the law as it is in America. This approach puts justice in jeopardy as it infers that previous bad conduct makes it probable that the present case is another example of it.
If Visto has a case then let it stand on its own merits.
Score: 0
|This is RIM vs NTP all over again. Companies have been using the technology Visto claims to have invented long before Visto applied for a patent. Windows 95 was probably the first major software product that introduced anything that remotely resembled this technology.
Microsoft has not misappropriated anything in this case.
Score: 0
|I know some of the fools from Visto and notice that they filed this suit in MARSHALL, TEXAS, a tiny town in east Texas, which they think will be favorably to them. Problem is with the idiots in the patent office handing out a patent for anything anymore. For example, did you know that NFL coaches are now allowed to patent their plays? yes, that's how insane the current government and congress has become.
Score: 0
|Our patent system is an ingenious system that promotes creative thinking while protecting the original source of the idea for a certain amount of time to allow for reward (be it monetarily or prestige).
To trash that would mean that trashing one of the engines that made America as successful and innovative as it has been regardless of the poor showings our current education has.
You can be dumb as a box of rocks but if you had just one good idea, you can live the American dream of being fat and rich. Before then, govt would rip off a persons intellectual property and not compensate the source of the idea...that is stifling to ingenuity and progress.
A football coach can apply for a patent because his career is based on innovating new ways to be successful based on these ideas. To steal his idea in the arena of competition (other nfl coaches) can capitalize on his innovation...though it would be hard to prove a particular play was stolen. I would view NFL coach patents as a prestigious thing.
Like saying Sam Wyche was the original source for the no huddle offense. Marv Levy gets all the credit. Poor Sam was the innovator...Levy stole it after he moaned about it then applied it after the AFC championship game with the Bengals.
Score: 0
|i,m no lover of microsoft or bill gates but give him a break he had a vision and turned it into a multi billion dollar company every bum who can,t cut it. sues microsoft because they made it with a market leading product if it wasn,t for him you would still be screwing around with DOS get a life ps What is VISTO anyway
Score: 0
|Visto is an unknown company looking for some space in the news... nothing else.
Score: 0
|Perhaps you should read the article...?
Visto is accusing Microsoft of "stealing" their ideas - hence Patent. Other companies do the "legal" thing and buy a license from Visto for it's technology.
On a side note: this doesn't reflect well on digital rights, especially in relation to piracy. Is it illegal to "steal" software that was originally made up of stolen code? Microsoft making a little paradox. ;-)
Score: 0
|Indeed, this is all it is. Just another bottom feeder wanting a piece of the Microsoft pie.
Score: 0
|I don't know about you guys, but I kind of find it funny that the company suing them is called Visto. Visto? Vista? I know it's off topic, but I couldn't help but chuckle.
Score: 0
|Ya know when I first read the headline that's what I though it was about, until I read the rest that is.
Score: 0
|I'm sure that's next on their list of lawsuits (rolls eyes)
Score: 0
|"Microsoft was not contacted before the suit was filed, Bogosian admitted during the conference call."
Nice, so don't even fire a warning shot, just jump right into the SUEFEST 2005. Morons. The judge should ream them for not even at least trying to settle this without taking up court time.
Score: 0
|Dang, this is getting annoying, and I'm just reading about it.
I can't imagine how MS must feel.
Score: 0
|It is getting rather annoying.
I can just imagine when they were notified of the suite.
"aaaaa.....it burns us!!!"
Score: 0
|here i go again..no originality on microsoft's part. they can't create their own, so they just steal or buy it.
Score: 0
|Nothing original come from Japanese either, they only make it better. Same as Microsoft. Bill Gates bought DOS because he has a vision. He borrows Mac and OS/2 and combine the best out of the 2 OS.
And you don't call them steal the technology until the court say soon. Everyone just want to get on "sue Microsoft" wagan because they are cash rich and no debt. Think about it, just sue, and if won, you get an award for like 200 mil, and can retire ever after.
Score: 0
|Screw paperwork, I say we torch 'em.
Score: 0
|Is there something in the air or what? What is up with all the Lawsuits? Did everyone suddenly forget how to negotiate? I don't see any effort on the part of the litigants in even TRYING to solve this without involving the courts.. This is getting totally out of hand.
Score: 0
|ah let them prove it in court, not like microsot hasn't stolen anything before...
Score: 0
|Next thing you know, they'll sue for having the next Windows sound a lot like Visto.
Don't they think Microsoft does their homework? I beleive Microsoft's research department knows of EVERY possible patent ever registered. The only reason judges rule against Microsoft is because of the hatered.
Score: 0
|ABSOLUTELY TRUE!
Next lawsuit probably on GUI by Xerox.... they should, LOL
Score: 0
|maybe they do their homework, but try to get away with it...sounds alot like school work, do just enough, and try to get away with the rest. If judges are ruling on hatred, then they shouldn't be judges, they are following the books when the rule against them.
Score: 0
|Well, Xerox never patented the GUI nor the mouse... ;)
Score: 0
|Well known huh???????
GAY suer..... never heard of it.
Just another money-leecher....!!!!
We've seen way too many of these cases!
Score: 0
|Visto who?
Score: 0
|8D
...a good point.
Score: 0
|This is ****ed up.
Why are companies soo jumpy these days. I guess its all about their money, and not about us.
The way Microsoft did it might have just been the best way to do it, in terms of the consumer...
Score: 0
|Yeah, I agree.. this is the reason we have to pay so much money for music, software, and electronics..
I think if they sue, and lose, they should pay immediately. Everyone goes to court, writes a check to some escrow company for the amount of the suit, both sides, and whoever wins, keeps the pot. If don't have the money to sue for the amount, don't sue for that amount. Get the money first then sue. Put the money where your mouth is.
I am talking companies not individuals.. If they TRULY have a case, a bank should be able to front them the money..
Score: 0
|Yeah, they do that.
Score: 0
|