Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Microsoft Eats Own Poison, Sued for Patent Infringement Again

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

Microsoft's stolen code and IP infringements

,----[ Quote ]
| Soon, MS-DOS 6.0 was released, including the Microsoft DoubleSpace
| disk compression utility program. Stac successfully sued Microsoft
| for patent infringement regarding the compression algorithm
| used in DoubleSpace...
| | F. Scott Deaver, owner of Failsafe Designs, says Microsoft is guilty of
| the "outright theft" of his product name and intellectual property
| (IP)...
| | Alacritech sued Microsoft in Federal District Court on August 11,
| 2004, alleging that Microsoft's existing and future operating
| systems containing the "Chimney" TCP offload architecture uses
| Alacritech's proprietary SLIC Technology architecture...
| | In April 2001, Intertrust initiated a lawsuit against Microsoft. The
| lawsuit ultimately accused Microsoft of infringing 11 of Intertrust's
| patents and almost 130 of the company's patent claims...
| | Visto Corporation has filed a legal action against Microsoft for
| misappropriating Visto's intellectual property... "Microsoft has a
| long and well-documented history of acquiring the technology of
| others, branding it as their own, and entering new markets," said
| Mr. Bogosian...
| | Telecoms company AT&T accused Microsoft of infringing its patent for
| a digital speech coder in its Window software in a lawsuit it filed
| in 2000...
| | The likelihood of Microsoft having to pay millions of dollars in
| damages for infringing the contested Eolas patent for web browser
| technology increased last week when the US Patent and Trademark
| Office reaffirmed the patent's validity...
| | A bitter fight has broken out between Symantec and Microsoft.
| Symantec claims that Microsoft stole code from Veritas software...

In all of these, why haven't the IP holders sued any of MS's customers; afterall, MS has [trumpetedly] claimed that Linux vendors give no indemnification, so the conclusion would be that MS /DOES/, and expects that IP holders /WOULD/ [sue].

Or is it just MS who would sink to such low tactics as to sue the end users who purchased the goods in good faith, not the suppliers who nicked the IP in the first place?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index