C
Chad Harris
The case is Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 05-1056 and oral argument was
2/21/07 Wednesday. MSFT litigates constantly,but this is probably their
first case that reached the US Supreme Court:
www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/10/court_to_hear_f_2.html
www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/20/yourmoney/msft.php
February 21, 2007
High Court Skeptical of Microsoft Patent Ruling
By REUTERS
Filed at 2:12 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed
doubts about whether Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O) should be liable for
infringing AT&T Inc.patents in Windows software sold overseas, a case that
could determine the reach of American patents in foreign markets.
Hearing arguments in the case, the justices sharply questioned AT&T's
assertion that software code could be deemed a ``component'' of a computer,
which would make overseas sales of the software an infringement under U.S.
patent law.
Two justices expressed concern that a ruling against Microsoft could
unintentionally subject other products sold overseas to U.S. patent law.
Justice Stephen Breyer said he would be ``quite frightened of deciding for
you and discovering that all over the world there are vast numbers of
inventions that really can be thought of in the same way that you're
thinking of this one.''
The Microsoft-AT&T dispute is one of a series of important patent cases now
before the court.
At issue is a ruling last year upholding a lower court decision that
Microsoft was liable for infringing an AT&T patent for converting speech
into computer code in copies of the Windows computer operating system sold
overseas.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the world's largest
software maker was liable for the unauthorized distribution of codec
technology, used to compress speech signals into data, in copies of Windows
overseas.
The U.S. Justice Department has sided with much of Microsoft's argument and
said the appeals court ruling ''improperly extends United States patent law
to foreign markets'' and puts U.S. software companies at a competitive
disadvantage.
____________________________________
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Justices question AT&T arguments in dispute with Microsoft
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - A lawyer for AT&T Corp. argued before a skeptical Supreme
Court on Wednesday that Microsoft Corp. is violating one of its patents when
it sends its Windows software overseas to be copied and placed on personal
computers.
Microsoft acknowledged that it violated AT&T's patent on speech encoding
technology when it sold Windows in the United States, but disputes that it
should be held responsible for infringement when the software is copied by
foreign manufacturers.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed some sympathy for Microsoft's argument,
suggesting AT&T should pursue its infringement complaint in overseas markets
where the copies are made.
''The whole question here is whether (the company) has to get a patent''
abroad, Breyer said.
At issue in the dispute is a section of patent law that bars companies from
shipping components of a patented invention overseas for assembly. The
intent of the provision, which became law in 1984, was to prevent companies
from circumventing patents by sending parts offshore to assemble them in a
way that would infringe the patent in the United States.
Two lower federal courts ruled in favor of AT&T. The Supreme Court is
expected to decide the case by July.
AT&T's lawyer, Seth P. Waxman, argued that the patent law ''does not reach
what anybody does overseas.'' Instead, Waxman said, Microsoft violated the
law when it sent its software from the United States to other countries to
be ''installed and stored in foreign computers.''
Microsoft's lawyer, Theodore B. Olson, countered that the company's software
is not a component until it is placed on a computer's hard drive or optical
disc and can actually be used by a computer.
''It is our position that the only components in this case are the physical
manifestations'' of the software, Olson said. It is the foreign manufacturer
that produces those components, he added, not Microsoft, which only sends a
master version of its software overseas.
Chief Justice John Roberts did not participate in the oral argument. Roberts
owns shares of Microsoft, according to the court's financial disclosure
forms.
2/21/07 Wednesday. MSFT litigates constantly,but this is probably their
first case that reached the US Supreme Court:
www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/10/court_to_hear_f_2.html
www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/20/yourmoney/msft.php
February 21, 2007
High Court Skeptical of Microsoft Patent Ruling
By REUTERS
Filed at 2:12 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed
doubts about whether Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O) should be liable for
infringing AT&T Inc.patents in Windows software sold overseas, a case that
could determine the reach of American patents in foreign markets.
Hearing arguments in the case, the justices sharply questioned AT&T's
assertion that software code could be deemed a ``component'' of a computer,
which would make overseas sales of the software an infringement under U.S.
patent law.
Two justices expressed concern that a ruling against Microsoft could
unintentionally subject other products sold overseas to U.S. patent law.
Justice Stephen Breyer said he would be ``quite frightened of deciding for
you and discovering that all over the world there are vast numbers of
inventions that really can be thought of in the same way that you're
thinking of this one.''
The Microsoft-AT&T dispute is one of a series of important patent cases now
before the court.
At issue is a ruling last year upholding a lower court decision that
Microsoft was liable for infringing an AT&T patent for converting speech
into computer code in copies of the Windows computer operating system sold
overseas.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the world's largest
software maker was liable for the unauthorized distribution of codec
technology, used to compress speech signals into data, in copies of Windows
overseas.
The U.S. Justice Department has sided with much of Microsoft's argument and
said the appeals court ruling ''improperly extends United States patent law
to foreign markets'' and puts U.S. software companies at a competitive
disadvantage.
____________________________________
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Justices question AT&T arguments in dispute with Microsoft
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - A lawyer for AT&T Corp. argued before a skeptical Supreme
Court on Wednesday that Microsoft Corp. is violating one of its patents when
it sends its Windows software overseas to be copied and placed on personal
computers.
Microsoft acknowledged that it violated AT&T's patent on speech encoding
technology when it sold Windows in the United States, but disputes that it
should be held responsible for infringement when the software is copied by
foreign manufacturers.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed some sympathy for Microsoft's argument,
suggesting AT&T should pursue its infringement complaint in overseas markets
where the copies are made.
''The whole question here is whether (the company) has to get a patent''
abroad, Breyer said.
At issue in the dispute is a section of patent law that bars companies from
shipping components of a patented invention overseas for assembly. The
intent of the provision, which became law in 1984, was to prevent companies
from circumventing patents by sending parts offshore to assemble them in a
way that would infringe the patent in the United States.
Two lower federal courts ruled in favor of AT&T. The Supreme Court is
expected to decide the case by July.
AT&T's lawyer, Seth P. Waxman, argued that the patent law ''does not reach
what anybody does overseas.'' Instead, Waxman said, Microsoft violated the
law when it sent its software from the United States to other countries to
be ''installed and stored in foreign computers.''
Microsoft's lawyer, Theodore B. Olson, countered that the company's software
is not a component until it is placed on a computer's hard drive or optical
disc and can actually be used by a computer.
''It is our position that the only components in this case are the physical
manifestations'' of the software, Olson said. It is the foreign manufacturer
that produces those components, he added, not Microsoft, which only sends a
master version of its software overseas.
Chief Justice John Roberts did not participate in the oral argument. Roberts
owns shares of Microsoft, according to the court's financial disclosure
forms.
