decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
Microsoft Hit With Preliminary Injunction in Patent Infringement Case
Wednesday, April 13 2005 @ 10:03 PM EDT

It sounds like the Burst.com case all over again, but this time, it's Alacritech suing Microsoft and winning a preliminary injunction, according to InternetNews.com. They say it could "keep Microsoft's Longhorn from getting out of the gate", because Alacritech claims Longhorn, and the Scalable Networking Pack for Windows Server 2003, includes their patented technology:

According to Alacritech, the company met with Microsoft and described its own Dynamic TCP Offload architecture, known as SLIC Technology, under a non-disclosure agreement in September 1998. Then, in April 1999, at Microsoft's request, it delivered a detailed document describing how SLIC could be integrated with Windows. It then shipped its first product based on SLIC in April 2000.

Microsoft broke off communications with Alacritech in June 1999, according to Alacritech, then presented Chimney in May 2003. . . .

"After Alacritech discovered that Microsoft Chimney is based on intellectual property that we developed, patented and own, we offered Microsoft a license," Larry Boucher, president and CEO of Alacritech, said in a statement. "Microsoft rejected licensing terms that would be acceptable to us. We were forced to sue Microsoft to stop them from continuing to infringe, and inducing others to infringe, on our intellectual property rights." The company refused further comment.

So, Microsoft is probably wanting to tweak the patent system right about now, I'm thinking.

UPDATE: Marbux found the complaint [PDF], the answer [PDF] and the Order Granting Preliminary Injunction [PDF], which says Alacritech was entitled to the preliminary injunction because, for one thing, they demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits with respect to validity and infringement.


  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )