Microsoft pays Timeline $5M in Patent Settlement

Craig69 writes "A US SEC report states that Timeline's patent infringement lawsuit filed against Microsoft, as owner of ProClarity, in United States District Court for the Western District of Washington has been settled. Microsoft has paid US$5M to Timeline in exchange for a license to a number of patents."

Make preparations for hypocrisy!

[CGDR2]

In this thread we reverse our views on patents:

Re:

[foobsr]

Nope, I shall not do so.

The patens are BS [europe-shareware.org], ...
"Timeline Inc. has been granted its sixth US Patent on data mart automation, that is to say financial reporting software. This patent contains 30 new claims, bringing the total number of claims to 137."

As I see it, they patent 'applied IT'.

CC.

Re:Make preparations for hypocrisy!

[FredDC]

Why do I get the feeling Microsoft is only paying up to prove a point to others?

"See, we pay our protection money! Why won't you?"

If they weren't trying to get others to pay for their patents, I doubt they would've paid a cent to Timeline! They would've gone to court and had their lawyers tear Timeline's arguments to pieces. Or they simply would've bought Timeline...

Re:Make preparations for hypocrisy!

[Jennifer York]

That was my first thought. But at $5M this is such a tiny sum of money that MS simply had to sign up. This avoids an RIM v. NTP scenario and is bargain. Also they acheive the "See, we pay our protection money! Why won't you?" bonus points...

Re:

[koweja]

People's ability to turn everything into MS being evil is truly amazing.

Re:Make preparations for hypocrisy!

[h4rm0ny]

At the risk of "you must be new here" comments, I think you have underestimated the intelligence of the /. crowd. I think most of us can recognize that stupid patents are a threat to us all. Microsoft-haters might take some satisfaction in seeing Microsoft cut itself on its own weapons, but most will draw the line at saying the patent action is a good thing, because we don't know who might get hit by it next.

I'm seeing more and more actual patent actions recently. I've read that one of the reasons a patent war hasn't kicked off is because everything was on hold while everyone was trying to get the Europeans to enact the same patent laws and approve the queue of US patents over here, thus increasing the size of the prize to be divvied up. Looks like that might not happen now, though, so it could be that things are heating up partly because of that? That and Microsoft looking at more desparate ways of putting down Linux.

Re:

[Gregb05]

most will draw the line at saying the patent action is a good thing, because we don't know who might get hit by it next.

Microsoft can write off a $5M loss on patents about as easily as they can write off Ballmer's lunch, but while $5M might not be much to Microsoft, I'm wondering if they knew what they were doing by handing the company money; After all, it's not particularly to Microsoft's advantage to kill a patent troll, they'd be doing their competitors a favor.

At the risk of a tinfoilhat, I think they're trying to arm Timeline, not defend their assets.

Re:

[morgan_greywolf]

No way. Timeline is the worst kind of a bottom feeder in the industry. They are patent trolls [tmln.com].

Re:

[Craig69]

So, a company works for almost 30 years developing new software products and selling those products to clients, only to have Microsoft take over their competition and steal their inventions, and even license some of their inventions and then illegally resell them [slashdot.org]. That company are "bottom feeders" if they don't just lay down and die completely? According to you, do companies which aren't bottom feeders simply let Microsoft run them out of business, because that's somehow the right thing to do?

Yes, but who really won here?

[skoaldipper]

$5M to a timeline?

dM/dt = $5

Re:

[jmagar.com]

Thanks for that. Don't know why, it's not that great a joke, but I still choked on my morning coffee. Nicely played!

A trap!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they were trying to lose the case to set the precedent for their linux FUD war

FTA:

[RandoX]

"Timeline, Inc. entered into a Confidential Settlement Agreement with Microsoft Corporation and ProClarity Corporation in settlement of..." Doesn't seem too confidential to me...

ah I see

[rucs_hack]

Well, I wish I had some patents, since it appears that nowadays in the US all you need to make it rich is a half baked poorly specified and over broad patent or two.

There's no way the patent troll is going to be going away, not while there are potentially so many billions to be made from having IP on paper.

I can also see why other countries, like China and India, would have reason to be positively delighted at this mess. After all, while the US is circling the IT drain and losing impetus on innovation due to the all singing all dancing patent, they can get on with actually doing new stuff.

Re:

[jkrise]

"countries, like China and India, would have reason to be positively delighted at this mess. After all, while the US is circling the IT drain and losing impetus on innovation due to the all singing all dancing patent, they can get on with actually doing new stuff."

Couple of weeks ago, a senior official in IBM India announced they have applied for 14,000 patents from 'innovative contiributions' arising form their Indian R&D outfit. So not only is innovation happening outside the US (and innovation fetche

Re:

[kripkenstein]

I can also see why other countries, like China and India, would have reason to be positively delighted at this mess. After all, while the US is circling the IT drain and losing impetus on innovation due to the all singing all dancing patent, they can get on with actually doing new stuff.

Non-US countries like China and India might have many reasons to be happy about their economies vs. the US, but you may be under a misconception regarding patents. It isn't as if those countries are anti-patent. Look e.g. at the 2007 WIPO patent report [wipo.int], specifically, the chart I linked you to about patent filings by country by year.

First thing that pops out is that Japan has the most patents filings, not the US. Another is that the EU and China are rapidly climbing, and may achieve parity with the US in

Re:

[rucs_hack]

Patents as such aren't the issue (my mistake in losing clarity there), I meant software patents.

Re:

[darkmeridian]

Timeline isn't a patent troll. It seemed to have created the inventions it owns the patents for. The company recently turned itself into a patent licensor (and closed its computer advising functions) probably because you can't compete with Microsoft.

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

The dispute has more to do than a simple overly broad patent. MS based their SQL Server product on some of Timeline's patents and technology. MS had a license to use the technology and patents; however, MS never had a license to sub-license Timeline's technology. A judge has already entered final judgment against MS in 1999 after a trial. This is one more case of MS dirty tricks. If MS wanted to sub-license the technology, it would have been easy since MS had gads of money. Rather MS decided not to

45% attorneys fees??

[maroberts]

I am in the wrong business.

I don't think Timeline made any money. In this it indicates that Timeline (and MS) paid $2.5m jury costs [lexisnexis.com], so it looks like MS coughed up $5mill to feed the lawyers and pay Timelines expenses.

Re:

[badfish99]

Jury costs? Does this really mean that the jury shared $2.5M between them? Or am I missing something in my understanding of the US legal terminology?

Re:

[faloi]

It's more clear in the link directly from the article. The cost from the primary article is referenced as attorney and court costs. The jurist(s) in the case would be the judges, so it's likely it's a mix of court costs and attorney fees that both companies are splitting.

Re:

[morgan_greywolf]

I don't think it matters. That's probably what they wanted. If you look at Timeline's website [tmln.com], you'll find these guys are patent trolls. They're probably not much more than a front for the lawyers. Think The SCO Group, only smarter.

Here's how things work

[PinkyDead]

1. Company A (Microsoft) infringes on Company B's (Timeline's) Patent
2. Company B details the infringement to Company A
3. Company A either accepts the claim and pays a settlement
        or
      Company A contests the claim and wins or loses.

Now if a company like Microsoft can understand this process, why can't a company like Microsoft understand this process?

bit more background

[ThirdPrize]

Not quite sure what is going on but M$ brought a company that was being done for patent infringement [patenthawk.com] at the time.

Re:

[morgan_greywolf]

Yeah. The buy was probably a good move for Microsoft. ProClarity [wikipedia.org] makes business intelligence and analytics software that integrates tightly with Microsoft SQL Server, specifically the Analysis Services. This was probably a strategic move on Microsoft's part to acquire them for their technology. The patent suit is just a thorn in the rose, so to speak, not likely part of any sinister plan.

$5M?

[Peter Simpson]

Ballmer probably spends that every week on new furniture.

One of the linked articles says Timeline is now solely in the business of licensing their patents, having sold off their software and development business. Looks like they may have picked the wrong company to troll...

Good PR

[Gothmolly]

Since MS probably spends $5/min on snacks for its employees, there's no real negative impact. And its good PR: Look how well they comply with laws, look how fair they're playing.

5 Million! To MS that's like loose change ...

[Herschel Cohen]

The cynical view might be the plaintiff was asking for less; MS might have booster the amount to get it noticed*.

* I dabble in writing fiction, so do not get overly incensed by a perhaps purposeful skewed view.

missing the point

[icbkr]

If you'll go have a look at www.ProClarity.com, you'll see the real damage. M$ has gobbled up yet another small innovative company. They didn't settle the suit, they bought out the litigant. Corporate wars are good us, right?