XML patent saga ends with Microsoft withdrawing application

SUBSCRIBE
Newsletter & Subscriptions Computerworld is New Zealand's only specialised information systems fortnightly.
Subscribe now for $100 (23 issues) and save more than 37% off the cover price!
SIGN UP
Newsletter & Subscriptions
Get the latest news from Computerworld delivered via email.
Sign up now
NZ Open Source Society hails decision; Microsoft says it wasn't influenced by opposition from Society
  • Share

Microsoft has withdrawn an application for a patent for word-processing XML documents, several years after it originally filed the application in New Zealand.

The full name of the patent was: “Word-processing document stored in a single XML file that may be manipulated by applications that understand XML.”

The New Zealand Open Source Society released a statement yesterday, saying that it has been informed by the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand that Microsoft has withdrawn its application for the patent.

The statement reads: “The NZOSS applauds the decision of Microsoft to abandon its attempt to use the legal system to deter interoperability through its software patent on XML word processing documents.

“As we move into a future increasingly dependent on technology and software, we hope Microsoft understands that open standards and interoperability are central to a robust and healthy computing environment.

“The NZOSS has been conducting patent oppositions against two XML patents filed by Microsoft since 2003.

“The NZOSS felt these patents presented a clear and present danger to both interoperability between Microsoft’s products and that of other vendors, and potentially would have allowed Microsoft to force other companies into patent licensing agreements in order to implement word processing documents in XML.

“The opposition to both the Microsoft XML patents has taken eight years to resolve, and the time and commitment of many of our members.

“A few years ago, after opposing the first patent, we agreed to a substantial limiting of the claims of the first patent, to such an extent that we don’t believe anyone will ever infringe it.

“Subsequently we opposed the second patent, and have been moving towards a hearing on the opposition.”

The first patent was number 525484; the second, which the NZOSS had opposed and which was withdrawn, was number 536149.

NZOSS filed an objection to the first patent in 2005.

A statement to Computerworld from Microsoft corporate affairs manager Waldo Kuipers says: “The patent application was withdrawn after a routine business review of Microsoft’s patent portfolio identified this application as being of comparatively low priority in New Zealand.

“The Open Specification Promise that Microsoft made in 2006 means that this technology has been available to the community on a royalty-free basis for some time now.

“The equivalent patents have been withdrawn in around 30 countries. The decision to withdraw the patent application was not influenced by the NZOSS opposition and equivalents were not under opposition anywhere else.

“Our withdrawal of the patent is a routine part of portfolio management. Patents that are determined to have little or no business value are routinely withdrawn in order to achieve cost savings. Withdrawal of the patent application does not imply any change to our view that innovators should have the option to patent their inventions.”
Comments
Keeping the Incumbents that way Microsoft and its cronies' support for software patents is all about keeping the incumbent monopolists... that way. This article "Is Microsoft a Patent Troll" spells it out quite well: http://www.informationweek.com/blog/229202638

Key quote: "The big losers in this game are the small innovators, who don't have a portfolio of patents to license and can't afford to fight patent lawsuits. The Microsoft of 1980 wouldn't have a chance against the patent portfolio of Microsoft 2010. Whether it's trolling or simply enforcing weak patents, it stifles innovation."
Posted by Dave Lane at 11:30:26 on June 20, 2011

Flag abuse

Lets move on Obviously Microsoft has it's own reason for withdrawing. I encouraged them to do exactly this rather than pursue the patent a long time ago. I only wish they had made the decision earlier.

But lets move on. Microsoft is far less important than it was when I began the NZOSS in 2003. The issues we face today are at once more complex and more important.

The NZOSS will always stand to support the freedom of developers from obstructive laws. However, we all face new challenges in future, and it is to these challenges we must now look.

While Open Source Software will play a part in this future, it is the values of Open Source which are spreading beyond the software world. The principles and values of open source might build a strong, more independent and more prosperous New Zealand.

It's nothing new. It is simply the process of cooperation, peer review and sharing. We need to begin to learn to adapt to a world that will be very different; one in which we will need to cooperate to survive. Technology will be key.

Open Government and Open Data are promoting these values; the value of evidence based policy over ideology. Of wide apolitical involvement in Government.

So Matt, Waldo, Dave, lets look to the challenge of the future together.

Posted by Peter Harrison at 21:50:17 on June 17, 2011

Flag abuse

heh "Here's what some fairly thoughtful people think about it"

You meant:

"Here's what some fairly thoughtful people from a Law Center that provides pro-bono legal services to developers of Free, Libre, and Open Source Software think about it"

:)
Posted by Matt at 15:26:51 on June 17, 2011

Flag abuse

heh Yes, Matt, as opposed to those in your position who stand to gain lots of money from perpetuating destructive litigation between companies, rather than contributing anything beneficial to society, technology, or the GDP.

I guess it won't come as any surprise whose interpretation I find more compelling. :)
Posted by Dave Lane at 16:28:19 on June 17, 2011

Flag abuse

heh See, that's the problem. You assume too much, you know too little.
Posted by Matt at 0:07:34 on June 18, 2011

Flag abuse

heh Please enlighten us, then, Matt. Without clarifying your point, you're just blowing smoke.
Posted by Dave Lane at 12:38:38 on June 18, 2011

Flag abuse

heh Yeah yeah big bad corporate blah blah blah
Posted by Anonymous at 18:16:04 on June 17, 2011

Flag abuse

heh Yeah yeah and this particular big bad corporate happens to be in decline.

Ha ha ha
Posted by Anonymous at 13:57:27 on June 19, 2011

Flag abuse

Waldo's spin

Here's what some fairly thoughtful people think about it: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html

Wasn't Microsoft keen to lead the charge for "high quality" patents? Well, Microsoft, here's a tip for free: if you stop submitting software patents, the quality of applications will leap immediately.

Just think, it only took 8 years to fight that bad software patent application. Wonder how many others - already granted - are of a similar quality. Most, I suspect.

[Please note this comment has been moderated]
Posted by Dave Lane at 14:30:51 on June 17, 2011

Flagged

Open Specification Promise Hi Dave, the Open Specification Promise (OSP) is an example of Fair, Rasonable and Non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms for patents, and is fairly typical of terms that underpin many open standards.

There will always be fringe opinions, but no one implementing a covered specification seems to have had a problem.

As mentioned in the Wikipedia article on the OSP, "Several standards and OSS licensing experts have expressed support of the OSP".

Lawrence Rosen, an attorney and lecturer at Stanford Law School: "I'm pleased that this OSP is compatible with free and open source licenses."

Standards lawyer Andy Updegrove in 2006: The Open Specification Promise is "what I consider to be a highly desirable tool for facilitating the implementation of open standards, in particular where those standards are of interest to the open source community."

On the topic of patent quality, Microsoft has been rated highly for patent quality in independent analysis (example - http://bit.ly/kIU4mH ).
Posted by Waldo at 9:46:42 on June 20, 2011

Flag abuse

computerworld
Computerworld NZ has now reached LinkedIn! Join to expand your networks and meet others interested in information systems.