OIN Posts Details of Microsoft's Anti-Tom Tom Patents 65
number6x writes "LinuxDevices.com is reporting that the Open Invention Network has posted the details of three of the eight patents used by Microsoft in the Tom Tom suit (which Tom Tom settled last month), asking the community for prior art. These patents cover aspects of the FAT file system. You can find them on Post-Issue.org — see numbers 5579517, 5758352, and 6256642. OIN CEO Keith Bergelt believes that these three patents are of tenuous validity and will probably not survive a review. Bergelt believes that there's a good chance that the USPTO may well invalidate them before the end of the year.
Re:Indicative of the brokenness of the system (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't matter. The reviews for prior art and the determination of patent infringement are separate. What seems to happen is that the patent is read narrowly when looking for a conflict with prior art, and broadly when looking for infringement. So the patent office and courts can simultaneously hold that a piece of prior art does not invalidate the patent, and that a particular device that uses something substantially similar to that same prior art is infringing.
Re:Why didnt TomTom look for this stuff? (Score:5, Informative)
I suspect that IBM's motivation was much more related to ensuring that their customers didn't get cold feet about linux than it was to avoid other people trying to sue them. SCO was threatening all linux users- and since IBM makes money off linux at this point, they, that meant SCO was threatening their entire customer base. That made it a very good idea for IBM to trounce SCO in court, proving that their customers were safe (and therefore should keep buying IBM products/services).
The GP is talking about a very different view. MS was never going to sue TomTom's users; they just wanted money from TomTom. It's not at all unlikely that the settlement cost less money than litigation would, and certainly is less distracting, so the GP's point is quite valid.
Re:Actual Patent Info (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Money back (Score:2, Informative)
Does TomTom get its money back when the patents are invalidated?
Since it was settled out of court, no. Not unless they manage to sue MS for bringing suit without merit or something.
Re:Why didnt TomTom look for this stuff? (Score:1, Informative)
Except that's not really how it happened.
It was Novell who buried SCOX (you know, since SCOX's whole case was based around the idea that they owned the rights to UNIX, when said rights, in fact, belong to Novell).