After four years of court battles, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled Microsoft had indeed violated a patent held by the company i4i, introduced in 1994 which explains the "methods and systems to handle separately the architecture and content of a document. " The editor has indeed used the patented algorithms to read and write files.
XML,. Docx or. COMC in its Word 2003 and 2007 More exactly, the Supreme Court found inadmissible the recent complaint filed by Microsoft, the latter demanding that the process of presentation of evidence of invalidity of a patent based on the prevalence of evidence, not on a clear and indisputable as is the case today.
If the Supreme Court had gone in the direction of Microsoft, the invalidity of certain patents would have been easier to demonstrate. The Supreme Court decision confirms the victory of justice i4i on Microsoft, after two failures on appeal in December 2009 and March 2010. The giant finally sees the passage sentenced to pay the small company of Toronto's $ 300 million (including interest) ... 
XML,. Docx or. COMC in its Word 2003 and 2007 More exactly, the Supreme Court found inadmissible the recent complaint filed by Microsoft, the latter demanding that the process of presentation of evidence of invalidity of a patent based on the prevalence of evidence, not on a clear and indisputable as is the case today.
If the Supreme Court had gone in the direction of Microsoft, the invalidity of certain patents would have been easier to demonstrate. The Supreme Court decision confirms the victory of justice i4i on Microsoft, after two failures on appeal in December 2009 and March 2010. The giant finally sees the passage sentenced to pay the small company of Toronto's $ 300 million (including interest) ...
No comments:
Post a Comment