Visto files against Microsoft over Push Email

[Guest Paul [MVP]]

Push e-mail pioneer Visto has filed legal action against Microsoft for 'misappropriating the technology that Visto and its cofounder helped develop nearly a decade ago'.

DOH! :)

An excerpt from the press release follows... the full copy of which can be found here

As one of many eagerly anticipating MSFP and the push email functionality that it brings, I sincerely hope this doesn't impact the anticipated Q1 2006 release of MSFP. :D HOWEVER, upon reading the filing, Visto are requesting, as well as damages and costs, an injunction against Microsoft to prevent them offering products that are deemed to be infringing the patent.

Will Visto succeed? I'm not a lawyer so I can't answer that, but from a good-of-the-consumer point of view, I'm inclined to hope for an MS victory on this one... ;)

P

Visto Corporation has filed a legal action against Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) for misappropriating Visto’s intellectual property. The complaint asserts that Microsoft has infringed upon multiple patents Visto holds regarding proprietary technology that provides enterprises and consumers with mobile access to their email and other data. The company is seeking a permanent injunction that would prohibit Microsoft from misappropriating the technology that Visto and its cofounder helped develop nearly a decade ago.

...

“Microsoft has a long and well-documented history of acquiring the technology of others, branding it as their own, and entering new markets,” said Mr. Bogosian. “In some cases, they buy that technology from its creator. In other cases, they wrongfully misappropriate the intellectual property that belongs to others, which has forced them to acknowledge and settle large IP cases with companies like Sun, AT&T and Burst.com. For their foray into mobile email and data access, Microsoft simply decided to misappropriate Visto’s well known and documented patented technology.”

...

“Innovative companies have been pummeled out of existence or into minor players after Microsoft decided to enter their markets,” Bogosian added. “Netscape and RealNetworks are among the best known examples. Courts around the world have ruled time after time against Microsoft, saying that it has acted either inappropriately or in violation of the law, especially concerning how they have treated competing companies. We will not let that happen to Visto.”

...

“We are confident that our country’s legal system will uphold the protections provided for in the law. The law protects innovators from corporate predators – large or small –including those with well documented histories of bad corporate behavior,” said Mr. Bogosian.

[Guest chucky.egg]

I think I disagree on the "for the good of the consumer" point

Assuming MS is guilty (which is an assumption, but based on their history... hmmm) then Visto have the right to protect their investments.

It's the same as the Warez argument - just because you can find sources of (illegal) software doesn't mean you're entitled to help yourself. The "consumer" of the Warez gets a good deal, but the developer doesn't, and in the long run thats bad for all consumers.

At the end of the day though this still isn't really Push email is it? Even MS are saying that it's just a different type of Pulling emails down. They just say it in circles that the general press and public don't pay much attention to, so the general perception of it being Push is perpetuated.

Edited December 15, 2005 by chucky.egg

[Guest Macker1973]

Visto and NTP have every right to protect the work they have been involved in driving this industry. This is another blatent attempt of Microsoft trying to profit from the work of others. All they have to do is sit down with Visto and pay a fee for the use of the patents or develop their own solution that does not infringe on a patent.

[Guest Paul [MVP]]

Assuming they are infringing the patent that is.

P

[Guest Tech]

me thinks its nonesense but im sure we will win :)

[Guest Tech]

Visto and NTP have every right to protect the work they have been involved in driving this industry. This is another blatent attempt of Microsoft trying to profit from the work of others.

research before making such nonesense statements.

[Guest fluffcat1]

research before making such nonesense statements.

Hear, hear!.....Quite right.

DO NOT download illegal files. period. why screw up your phone and get "busted" by the network operator in case if your phone gets busted? you will not only void your warrenty but apperently also will fine you for doing this.

source: orange

as well as this, I know a good friend who works for a company who gives their employees the smartphones and thats pretty much what they were saying too. And to add to that - the same for me for the company i work for!

But orange themselves have said this - its to crack down, in a sense, illegal software (damn right should be too!) and also the time spent to replace the hardware on the phone due to illegal OS's being installed on the phone. It's not easy to "wipe" it off.

:roll: :)

Richard

[Guest dm.wood]

Assuming they are infringing the patent that is.

P

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Pauls view on this.. "assuming they are infringing the patent".

Microsoft may not be infringing anything at all.

The US patent office has a bad reputation for allowing people and organisations to patent basically nothing nore than an idea..with no specifics or working examples.

Visto may have thought about the principles of push technology using SMS .. or some other protocol ....however I doubt they actually thought of a solution using Microsoft Exchange server and MS Activesync ... before Microsoft actually introduced Exchange 2003 email server and Mobile Activesync :D

If you want to know more about the US patents office and its slightly cloudy history go investigate who was the first person to develop the standard household telephone as we know it now. "Alexander Graham Bell" I hear you say ...well actually not... and the US congress finally accepted this in 2002! and it was all down to the US patent office and its inclination to allow ideas to be patented... apparently this happens in the present day too.

Food for thought anyway :)

[Guest Will]

so if blackberry(RIM) are on shakey ground, MSFP is now having this.. i guess it's back to regular polling emails for the time being! -

whatever happens PUSH is the way things will go.. just depends who's doing it i guess

[Guest Macker1973]

research before making such nonesense statements.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have done my reasearch. Its clear that this is why Microsoft have been delaying the release of this update for WM5 releases for this very reason.

Heres the three patents in question

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,085,192

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,708,221

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,151,606

Microsoft have also bundled the software with Exchange server and clearly Microsoft have not paid heed to rulings on this in the past.

Its about time Microsoft started to become innovators instead of corporate sharks.

[Guest Paul [MVP]]

On what basis are you stating that Microsoft have 'delayed the release of MSFP for this very reason'?

When you mean the software is bundled with Exchange Server, what do you mean exactly? Mobile Device sync in Exchange Server is so obviously an integral part of the product, I wouldn't interpret it as bundling at all. It's like making a mail server without POP3 sync because that would be unfair bundling?!?

P

I have done my reasearch. Its clear that this is why Microsoft have been delaying the release of this update for WM5 releases for this very reason.

Heres the three patents in question

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,085,192

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,708,221

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...RS=PN/6,151,606

Microsoft have also bundled the software with Exchange server and clearly Microsoft have not paid heed to rulings on this in the past.

Its about time Microsoft started to become innovators instead of corporate sharks.

[Guest dazza12]

Bearing in mind there were a couple of devices that already did the above before the patents were registered, it's Visto that are on shaky ground.

NTP would have gone after Visto for this reason, but they've sat down with them and worked out a deal. NTP have effectively cut off Blackberry (there's a current injunction preventing the service from operating in the US, temporarily suspended for now), but they've not got the resources to fight MS on their own.

NTP have no products of their own, the company is just a team of lawyers registering generic ideas without any means of proving the concept. Visto on the other hand do have a product.

Reading the very vague patents that have been registered, this would also cover SMS and similar messaging systems. The Visto (and NTP) patents are so vague, you could name at least 10 other products that would infringe this. Many of these are 'prior art', in other words operating before the patents were registered.

Some of you may be MS haters (in which case, why are you on an MS Smartphone forum?), and would like nothing better than for MS to take a beating. This has further implications than just giving Bill Gates a couple of sleepless nights. If Visto win, and NTP succeed in toppling RIM, smaller companies will be scared of innovating in case their idea infringes on a vague patent. Larger companies would be afraid of licensing technologies from others, open source projects would have a hard time getting off the ground, all for the same reasons.

If Visto do win, I'm going to look into registering some silly patents. Maybe I can register speeding, or breathing. I'll make a fortune.

These patents are US only. The advantage that MS have is that the rest of the world is still a viable market for them, unlike RIM who have 70% of their operations in the US.

Regarding the issue of Exchange server, many of what is included is covered by RFCs that were written well before NTP or Visto's patents were filed. And if they do win, what does this mean for IBM, or even a couple of Linux distributions with similar features?

Edited December 18, 2005 by dazza12

[Guest dm.wood]

Bearing in mind there were a couple of devices that already did the above before the patents were registered, it's Visto that are on shaky ground.

Reading the very vague patents that have been registered, this would also cover SMS and similar messaging systems. The Visto (and NTP) patents are so vague, you could name at least 10 other products that would infringe this. Many of these are 'prior art', in other words operating before the patents were registered.

If Visto do win, I'm going to look into registering some silly patents. Maybe I can register speeding, or breathing. I'll make a fortune.

These patents are US only. The advantage that MS have is that the rest of the world is still a viable market for them, unlike RIM who have 70% of their operations in the US.

Regarding the issue of Exchange server, many of what is included is covered by RFCs that were written well before NTP or Visto's patents were filed. And if they do win, what does this mean for IBM, or even a couple of Linux distributions with similar features?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Like I said before ..the US patent office is allowing ideas to be patented.. without working examples.

Nearly every comment in the patents above refers to "the system"....

I know...... I have a system that allows me to empty my trash in the bin. It involves a human walking a nearby dumptser and heaving the trash in to it. What a great idea! ..think i will patent that... as a system for trash emptying :)

Watch out all you folks who go to empty your trash from now on ..my system is now patented.. and you will be subject to a law suite :D

I could understand it if NTP had working examples when they filed the patent and that it was clear that Microsoft's working "system" replicated the exact behaviour of NTPs system...but NTP never had a working example ..so where is the infringement?

Microsoft have built a system that NTP only had the vaguest of thoughts about.

If you ask me it's crap like this that stiffles innovation and developement of actual working products that can be delivered to the consumer, and presents an opportunity for a greedy bunch of lawyers to line their fat pockets even more!

[Guest Macker1973]

On what basis are you stating that Microsoft have 'delayed the release of MSFP for this very reason'?

When you mean the software is bundled with Exchange Server, what do you mean exactly? Mobile Device sync in Exchange Server is so obviously an integral part of the product, I wouldn't interpret it as bundling at all. It's like making a mail server without POP3 sync because that would be unfair bundling?!?

P

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This solution is has been ready for a while now. It was in a keynote speech 8 months ago at TechEd in Orlando and I would doubt they would released the exchange service pack without having tested with some sort of client. The delay to see the outcome of the Seven/Smartner/Visto case to see how those patents held up was wise. After all releasing an OS which infringes a patent would be a disaster.

No its cleary not an integral part of Exchange Server. Exchange server certainly does not rely so called push email as it has only been introduced in service pack 2. Also other companies have produced very similiar solutions that work with exchange server that are not integrated. Microsofts have clearly marketed this solution that you do not need a third party server. Its splashed all over their white parties and any comments they make. This is clearly a way of using their exchange market to exploit the mobile market place. This is very similiar in the way they used windows to exploit the browser market and the media player market.

[Guest MadSci]

Like I said before ..the US patent office is allowing ideas to be patented.. without working examples.

Nearly every comment in the patents above refers to "the system"....

I know...... I have a system that allows me to empty my trash in the bin. It involves a human walking a nearby dumptser and heaving the trash in to it. What a great idea! ..think i will patent that... as a system for trash emptying ;)

Watch out all you folks who go to empty your trash from now on ..my system is now patented.. and you will be subject to a law suite :D

I could understand it if NTP had working examples when they filed the patent and that it was clear that Microsoft's working "system" replicated the exact behaviour of NTPs system...but NTP never had a working example ..so where is the infringement?

:D

FYI, the US Patent Office stopepd requiring the presentation of a 'working example' around the turn of the century. Invention is an intellectual act :idea: , not a tradesman's toil.

What is required is that the Invention be: Novel, Useful and Non-Obvious, and that the Inventor provide a written description of the Innvetion that is sufficient for one of "ordinary skill in the Art" to duplicate it "without undue experimentation".

For software, this is a pretty easy standard to meet, assuming that you think that the first realization of a particular idea isn't 'obvious'.

The situation is tough enough for tradtional products, but for software and business techniques, the Patent Office seems to have assumed that since these two areas of Patentable Art are new to the US Patent Office, everything within them is 'Novel' the first time it's presented to them.

So, was the idea of storing a customer's ordering info, and linking it to an on-line purchase with a single 'click' "Novel", arguably it was when the Internet was young, but to my mind it was certainly "Obvious".

These kind of arguements go on forever, but remember, the USPTO has allowed the patenting of a stick, and a "Method of swinging on a swing", so it can get pretty rediculous.

Nevertheless, if a Patent is issued, you violate it at your peril, and a license is usually cheaper than a fight. And don't assume that since a Plaintif is not a manufacturer that they are just leeches, often the only way the little guy can afford to get Justice is to sell his patents to Firms like this who invest in them and have to pay the price to collect.

Just my $0.02

Mad Sci :D

(14 US Patents Issued, 30-odd Pending, over 100 Pending in other countries with one European Patent Issued)