American Claimed Internet Violated His PatentsAdded: Saturday, February 11th, 2012
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
While nobody in the United States seems to be willing to do anything about the country’s bizarre patent system, one guy is going to try and screw this system.
Michael Doyle claimed recently that he and two of his fellows were first to invent and patent the “interactive web”, while they were working for the University of California back in 1993. He said that the software, designed at the UC’s San Francisco campus, allowed doctors to view embryos over the nascent web, and was recognized to be the first program allowing people to interact with the images inside of an Internet browser window.
Michael Doyle is currently fighting in East Texas, which has a record of giving over to patent trolls, in most cases because their side of the argument is considered the easiest for juries to understand. Doyle is suing nearly everyone, insisting that he must get trillions for royalty payments for almost every modern web technology. Meanwhile, this isn’t the first time Doyle launched a patent case, and he used to win them. For instance, his organization Eolas Technologies has already won the case against Microsoft, perhaps winning over $100 million from the software giant.
This new case pits Doyle against attorneys of Amazon, Yahoo, Google, and YouTube, as well as against the father of the Internet: it turned out that Sir Tim Berners-Lee himself has flown in for the case, since if Michael Doyle won, it would be the end of the Internet as we know it. As a result, everyone will have to pay to patent troll in the United States.
The global web standards group W3C has contacted the patent office and sent a letter signed by Sir Tim, where he warned that unless the Eolas patent was invalidated it would have caused the disruption of global Internet standards, as well as caused damage to the operation of the web.
Although the PTO originally rejected the Eolas patent claims, Michael Doyle and his attorneys insisted that they had the right to claim, and in the end the PTO changed its mind. This fact is currently used by Doyle as proof that others agree he had invented the web. In response, the tech companies sued in the case asked the judge to transfer the case to California, where it would have been laughed out of court, but they were refused to do so. The case in question is also embarrassing for the University of California, since the latter could make a lot of money if Michael Doyle wins.
February 11th,2012Posted by:
Saturday, February 11th, 2012
|Well there goes the internet, you were all worried about Hollywood and forgot about the lawyers.|
|its all about money, its amazing how old things come up when someone else makes a profit off your idea|
|posted by (2012-02-11 23:18:36)|
|This guys is just trying to screw with everyone for a payday, tell em to p*ss off.|
|Michael Doyle claimed recently that he and two of his fellows were first to invent and patent the “interactive web”,while they were working for the University of California back in 1993.|
What dik Head Doyle is not saying that every University you do research, etc. They have the tech and what ever patent rights.
Another point Dik Head Doyle isn't making and being quiet on it patents last 17 years so 1993; well it is past 17 years..
Just found this:
Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Troll’s Claim to Own the Interactive Web
By Joe Mullin
February 9, 2012 |
TYLER, Texas — After threatening web companies for more than a decade, Michael Doyle and his patent-holding company Eolas Technologies — named after the Irish word for knowledge — may be finished.
An eight-member federal jury in East Texas deliberated Thursday for just a few hours before concluding that all of Eolas’ asserted claims of ownership to technology allowing access to the interactive web were invalid. That means the three upcoming trials that were scheduled to rule on infringement and damages, for Google, Yahoo and other companies, have been canceled. The eight defendant companies who resisted the lawsuits won’t pay anything to Eolas or its partner, the University of California, for using the web.
Eolas maintained its patents entitled the company to royalty payments from just about anyone running a website with “interactive” features, like rotating pictures or streaming video. The chief issue in the case was whether the first computer program that allowed access to an “interactive web” was created by the little-known Chicago biologist Doyle, who runs Eolas out of Chicago. Or was it one of the web pioneers put on the stand by the defendant companies — such as Pei-Yuan Wei and his Viola browser, or Dave Raggett and his <embed> tag?
The dueling teams of lawyers have spent millions creating elaborate presentations, trying for the last three days to convince a jury of average folks in a federal district court in eastern Texas that their side was right.
If the jury had upheld the patents, there would have been a potentially brutal damages phase in which Google, YouTube, Yahoo, Amazon, JC Penney, CDW Corp. and Staples would have been sued for infringement and been asked for more than $600 million in damages, with the majority of that coming from Google, Amazon and Yahoo.
The Eolas patents were denounced for years before this week’s landmark trial, but managed to survive repeated re-exams at the United States Patent and Trade Office.
However, Thursday’s verdict is likely a setback Eolas can’t overcome. It may well be appealed, but that will be a long process, and in the meantime Eolas won’t be able to go after new targets.
After the trial, Judge Leonard Davis visited with the jurors a while, as is his custom. They were awed, I’m told—as they often are—why such an important web case ended up in Tyler.
Apparently they were a little star-struck by Tim Berners-Lee, although you certainly couldn’t tell during trial.
At “Rick’s on the Square” opposite the courthouse, defense lawyers were celebrating. There was a giddy atmosphere; these folks truly felt like they saved the Web today.
As for the winner’s reactions: Yahoo spokeswoman Dana Lengkeek said: “Yahoo is pleased with the outcome of the case and the jury’s decision, and we thank the jury for their time and commitment to this case. Yahoo respects intellectual property and will continue to protect its freedom to operate by defending itself against meritless claims.”
Kate Coultas, a spokeswoman for JCPenney – the only primarily bricks-and-mortar retailer who continued fighting the patent, added: “JCPenney is very pleased about the jury’s decision and thank all of them for their service. We also want to thank the true inventors who traveled from all over the world to testify in this matter and tell the real story about who invented the technology.”
Google spokesman Jim Prosser was less effusive. “We are pleased that the court found the patents invalid, as it affirms our assertion that the claims are without merit,” Prosser said.
Despite winning, Amazon declined to comment.
Lead Eolas attorney Mike McKool did not return a call seeking comment.
However, Douglas Cawley of McKool Smith in Dallas, a lawyer for Eolas did tell Bloomberg, “We’re disappointed, but we respect the jury’s decision. We will evaluate our options.”
As for the many companies that settled with Eolas, they might be regretting that pragmatic decision in light of the verdict.
Those companies include: Apple, Argosy Publishing, Blockbuster, Citigroup, eBay, Frito-Lay, JP Morgan Chase, New Frontier Media, Office Depot, Perot Systems, Playboy Enterprises International, Rent-A-Center, Sun Microsystems (bought by Oracle while this litigation was underway), and Texas Instruments.
|you got it all wrong, everybody knows Al Gore invented the internet!!!!! LOL|
|why ? ,just have the guy killed and everybody is happy , put it off as an accident or such as usual wich only cost you bout 20g's unlike having to pay up 100 million , protip|
|posted by (2012-02-12 13:05:54)|
|i invented the internet|
|posted by (2012-02-12 14:01:08)|
|if he has invented the Internet doesn't that make him responsible for all the online piracy/ copyright infringement going on|
|Seriously.... in June 1994 "Lynx" Text web Browser was created. Supporting HTML 1.0/1.1 Text mode with 4bit Still-GIF Rendering.... But you should know DEVELOPMENT started as early as 1989. But HTTP Protocols at the time were not what they were in 1994 and FTP was the primary file transferring method. Not something you want to be using for "Web" browsing as its known today.|
Lynx 6/94 - Doyle 8/94. it was the same year, but a two month's apart..., and to think this guys a little confused... his project is nothing related to "HTTP Protocol Transmitted HTML". The "Browser" as we know it, Renders "HTML 1.1/1.0", "XHTML", "XML" and multi-platform images including JPEG, GIF, and PNG. All which he does NOT have the rights to or licenses from there respective Creators.
He had NOTHING to do with the "Browser"...
Now are we talking the "Internet"?, he better go back 20+ years if he wants to challenge that...
Next are we talking "HTML"?. HyperText Markup Language is part of "ENQUIRE", a project Created at CERN back in 1980.
Next, are we talking HTTP? Earliest Documented Version: HTTP V0.9 (1991). - But Dave Raggett, Claims there was Working Early versions of the protocol dating back to the 1980's: "Used at CERN to transmit Static text files."
So Whats left? Is he going to throw a patent that uses similar "Wording", to define in "Spirit" what the Internet Browser Does, due to Years of improvement and advancement by people. FIRST Starting with a OPEN SOURCE project that far pre-dates his own Designs?
If he won that, All Dictionary publishers would have to close there doors. Because, All word Definitions as there relative uses Would be Legally considered "Invalid"
Because, the word "Unlimited" as defined is "Without Limits" but when defined in the Same Charistics when used by US Based ISP's. Its defined as "With the lack of impartial Limits, but not required to boundary-less Limits" - As they advertise and lists the word "Unlimited" but provide Limits of Service.
Because in the same way, “interactive web”, defines anything that is "capable of acting on each other" and does so in a manner that is "Connected by strong bonds" or if you used the Disambiguation of the Slang term "World Wide Web" coined in 1991(Note: Earlier than his PATENT!), "A Communication Method".
Heck under that definition you could say he invented the Touch Tone Telephone! - Again its a impossible ideal and it CONFLICTS with Earlier Patents and Copyrights.
Go on and claim Mark @ Facebook stole youre idea, like every other "Get Rich Quick" Schemer out there.
|/This seems odd. /The internet was made for to count the dispersion of atoms and where there at. Now its for movies, useless talk, cyberwar. /I say all 0's and 1's all this should be free. Movies, Free internet ETC. /No one stole anyones ideas, they were out there even before ~Us/Them~ imagined them. /Everyone should be like this. /I found water I will share it. /Next thing in 50 years what next ~The Elite~ are going to charge you for ~AIR~, just like they do for your ~WATER~.|
An Idea should be used for good of all people of this Dirt Watery Planet, not for peti-Materialists that know everything goes. ~Peace, Love, Respect, To all Creatures.
|Hell I'm going to patent the universe, alternative universes and the space between them... oh and i'll also be patenting God coz I invented him too.|
Right now Prove me wrong, bear in mind I have an eternal soul, as can be testified by God and he will also back up my claims of inventing the universes.
Most Popular Stories