Microsoft found itself joined by two new allies, Dell and Hewlett-Packard, in its Texas court battle against a small Canadian company, i4i, which says Redmond violated its XML-related patent. If the verdict is upheld, copies of Microsoft Word will need to be pulled from store shelves, which could negatively affect major customers within Microsofts software ecosystem such as Dell and Hewlett-Packard.Microsoft has two new legal allies, Dell and Hewlett-Packard, who both intend to file
amicus briefs in a patent-infringement case that could see copies of Word pulled
from store shelves within weeks.
The briefs to be filed by Dell and Hewlett-Packard will
support Microsofts
appeal brief, filed on Aug. 25, asking a Texas court to reverse its verdict
that Microsoft violated a custom XML patent held by i4i, a small Canadian
company. That verdict stipulated that Microsoft Word, which allegedly utilizes
the technology behind the patent, would need to be yanked from stores within 60
days.
On top of that, the court also ordered Microsoft to pay
nearly $300 million in fines.
As distributors of Microsoft software, Dell and
Hewlett-Packard both face the prospect of massive financial damage if the
verdict in the case is allowed to stand. Even if Microsoft altered Word to
sidestep the patent, both companies would need to expend a good deal of cash and
time in order to reintegrate the productivity platform into their devices.
Meanwhile, i4i had its own reaction to Microsofts appeal, which
is set to be heard in Federal Court on Sept. 23. An eWEEK breakdown of the
patent itself can be found here.
In an Aug. 26 statement, i4i Chairman Loudon Owen said that
Microsofts newest brief "captures the hostile attitude of Microsoft toward
inventors who dare to enforce patents against them."
"It is also blatantly derogatory about the court system,"
Owen added. "We do not have the gargantuan financial resources of Microsoft, but
i4i has the protection of fairness under the U.S. justice system. Microsoft is
not above the law."
Microsofts 101-page brief suggested that the presiding judge
had failed as a "gatekeeper" and that the court had erred in its interpretation
and application of the law. The appeal suggests that i4i failed to collaborate
the creation date of the technology behind the patent, which was filed in 1994,
and that the court had accepted "manipulated" surveys of infringing-patent use.
"This is not justice," Microsofts counsel wrote in the
preliminary statement for the brief. Justice or not, Microsoft also has
relatively few options on the table for avoiding the verdicts repercussions; a
technological workaround for Word may not be feasible given the time
constraints, and i4is executives indicated in an interview with eWEEK that they
may choose to pursue the case rather than settle out of court.
"Where we come from, if someone tries to take something that
belongs to you, you stand up to them; you dont just reach for the calculator," Owen
told eWEEK on Aug. 14.