Court to review $290 million patent-infringement judgment against Microsoft
The Supreme Court is going to hear Microsoft’s appeal in the patent case that led to an injunction on sales of Microsoft Word.
In 2007, i4i sued Microsoft for infringing a patent that made it it possible for computer users to use regular word processors as XML/SGML editors. In 2009, the Federal Court for the Eastern District of Texas awarded over $240 million in damages and granted an injunction against Microsoft Word. Microsoft proceeded to remove the code in question from Word 2003 and Word 2007 (it also is not in Word 2010).
The decision of the lower court was upheld by the appeals court; now its up to the Supreme Court to render the final decision.
The selection of a district court in East Texas for the initial case is in itself interesting. i4i is Canadian, Microsoft is headquartered in Redmond, Washington. The Tyler, Texas district court is the reputed “patent troll” capital of North America, where plaintiffs tend to win big judgments. i4i’s selection of the Tyler district court may lead some to think less of the ruling.
Microsoft claims the patent is invalid. A key question in the case before the high court is whether proving a patent invalid requires clear and convincing evidence – historically used by the federal courts – or merely a preponderance of evidence. Large high-tech companies such as Microsoft, Google, and Apple say the bar is too high, leading courts to uphold dubious patents and making it costly to defend against patent-infringement lawsuits.
Federal law doesn’t explicitly state a standard for challenging the validity of a patent, although it says that patents are presumed to be valid.
The Supreme Court anticipates ruling on the case during their current session; a decision is expected by July.
