AfterDawn: News

Appeals court judges question damages in Microsoft-i4i patent case

Appeals court judges have called the $290 million damages awarded to i4i in a patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft. i4i had originally won its case against Microsoft, which resulted in $290 million damages to be paid by Microsoft and an injunction against the sale of Microsoft's Word 2003 and Word 2007 applications.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed that injunction earlier this month. Judge Kimberly Moore of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took issue with the calculation of the damages; specifically that it assumed that users who bought a $90 version of the software from Microsoft would have paid considerably higher to pay for an alternative.



"Not everyone who is willing to pay $90 or $200 for a product is willing to pay $500," she said. The grilling wasn't just for i4i's side however, as Judge Alvin Schall pressed Microsoft's representatives on a claim that there is "no direct evidence" that anyone at Microsoft actually read the patent in question.

"I find it hard to believe that Microsoft didn't read the patent," the Judge said. i4i claims it approached Microsoft in 2000 for licensing negotiations, and that the two companies made joint presentations but never reached an agreement. Microsoft has acknowledged being in contact with i4i about the XML patent, but it has asked the appeals court to overturn the lower court's decision.

Written by: James Delahunty @ 23 Sep 2009 19:57

• Previous article

• Skype deal 'is going to close': eBay CEO

• Next article

• Pics of Microsoft Turtle, Pure handsets surface

• 4 comments

• ZippyDSM

  So...your going to question something that has made billions and yet the IP owners only want a petty 300mill?

  23.9.2009 22:23 #1

• Josipher

  Originally posted by ZippyDSM: So...your going to question something that has made billions and yet the IP owners only want a petty 300mill?
  that and M$ ceacing to distribute that something,causing much more damage than the 290 mil

  24.9.2009 01:30 #2

• KillerBug

  "Not everyone who is willing to pay $90 or $200 for a product is willing to pay $500," she said. The grilling wasn't just for i4i's side however, as Judge Alvin Schall pressed Microsoft's representatives on a claim that there is "no direct evidence" that anyone at Microsoft actually read the patent in question."
  
  Perhapse this is a little true, but the fact is that the software isn't even worth $20...people buy it anyway, ignoring the high cost and low quality, as well as the free alternatives. The truth is that many of those who bought office (especialy the USA government) would have paid whatever microsoft asked for without even bothering to get bids from other vendors. Microsoft Office is the standard, and people pay lots of money to get certified in it...using a superior, free software like OpenOffice makes those certifications worthless...so these people insist on paying a fortune for bad software just because it keeps their existing certifications usefull.

  24.9.2009 05:44 #3

• ChiknLitl

  I have office pro 2003 and 2007. I use Word and powerpoint quite a bit but rarely use excel. I would never have paid $200, or $500 for the software. If MS was smart they would make an argument that not everyone who has the suite uses all of the apps. How many of us have used Onenote? ---Chikn

  24.9.2009 11:23 #4