Patent Law

Tagged

By Gary Odom and Jordan Kuhn

Singapore-based Uniloc sued Microsoft in 2003 over 5,490,216, which claims a system for software product activation, which Microsoft uses in its Windows operating systems (XP, Windows Server 2003) and Office (XP version). '216 has a 1992 priority date. Wednesday, a Rhode Island jury found the patent valid, and Microsoft willfully infringing. The tab: $388 million, with $194 million attributable to foreign activations.

In the first round, Judge William E. Smith granted summary judgment for Microsoft, finding that Uniloc had been unable to demonstrate infringement, namely, that the same algorithms were used on both the client and server side of Microsoft's activation system. That was overturned on appeal.

The trial leading to the verdict began March 23.

Reeling with denial, Microsoft snorted, "We believe that we do not infringe, that the patent is invalid and that this award of damages is legally and factually unsupported. We will ask the court to overturn the verdict."

Failing judicial reversal in this case, or coming to settlement terms, Microsoft is headed towards a succeeding assertion against more recent products, and a stiffer tab. $388 million is in the neighborhood of the fifth largest jury award.

Uniloc practices the '216 invention, selling a software toolkit to developers that offers flexible licensing terms, such as trial periods.

Full post as published by The Patent Prospector on April 10, 2009 (boomark / email).