Eolas sues half of the Internet
Eolas Technologies is targeting most of the Internet in its latest lawsuit, which accuses multiple companies of flagrant patent infringement.
According to an article over on DownloadSquad, the infamous company - which describes itself as an "Internet technology provider" - has filed suit in Texas this week to "assert the company's intellectual property rights based on two groundbreaking patents, including one that has passed two separate reexaminations at the United States Patent and Trademark Office."
The main patent in the case - number 7,599,985 - is described as a "continuation of the '906 patent" which saw the company gaining a multi-million dollar judgement against Microsoft a few years ago, and covers the idea that websites can "add fully-interactive embedded applications to their online offerings through the use of plug-in [sic] and AJAX web development techniques" and was issued to the company earlier this month.
Michael Doyle, chairman of Eolas, claims that his company "developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources," and claims that "all we want is what's fair."
Perhaps the most interesting thing about what could be just another patent suit is the list of defendants: while the big names in e-commerce are listed - including Amazon, Apple, eBay, Office Depot, and Staples - it also includes web firms such as Google - and its YouTube subsidiary - Go Daddy Inc., and Yahoo!. As if that wasn't enough, the suit goes on to name major US banks with on-line offerings including Citigroup - owner of Citibank - and JP Morgan Chase & Co.
Not even the food and pornography industries - possibly closest to the heart of any true American - escape accusation, with PepsiCo-owned crisp manufacturer Frito-Lay and Playboy Enterprises also named in the suit.
If its claims are upheld, Eolas could be in line for a serious payout from the massive list of defendants - although with the list of targets so big you can't help but wonder if the company has bitten off more than it can chew this time around.
Do you think that Eolas has a valid claim, or is it simply attempting to cash in on others' success? Share your thoughts over in ]the forums.
Previous Article
48 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyGood luck with that one!
Greedy parasitic sods.
There they go again: 90% of lawyers give the rest a bad name ;)
Aye, it should be in the guinness book.
Yours in Anti-Corporate cheating Plasma,
Star*Dagger
hahaha
(Patents don't last forever...)
In the US the state of Colorado OWNS RAIN WATER - it is Illegal to set a barrel outside to "collect rain water."
This isn't the most bizarre thing to come across any of the named companies being accused of infringement.
Another note, tech firms such as Microsoft, Apple and I'm sure many others, are where they are at today because they cheated someone or stole something.
I'm glad someone has the balls to stand up to not just one - but SO MANY BIG NAMES! lol and at the same time!!!
I didn't know you could own the rights to something like that but okay, if they own it they deserve their money.
FFS! CAN'T THEY JUST STOP DOING THAT?! IT'S OUTRAGEOUS!!!
Scrap the patents now or else they should bring the big ones down to the floor. It's the only way to change that mentallity.
Ehm hold on. Had an idea about taxing breathing. See ya in court.
Sam
was anyone else offended by this remark??? its like me saying... well Im sure you know the stereo types that the English have so I wont go over those but still come on not cool.
note that the patent was filed in 2002. also note that the patent is brad enough to apply to interactive frames in a web page. as far as i am concerned this is a patent for a basic concept of what the web is.
since the patent also has the stipulation "The method of claim 1 where automatically invoking does not require interactive action by the user." and method 1 is "A method for running an application program in a distributed hypermedia network environment, wherein the network environment comprises at least one client workstation and one network server coupled to the network environment, the method comprising: receiving, at the client workstation from the network server over the network environment, at least one file containing information to enable a browser application to display at least a portion of a distributed hypermedia document within a browser-controlled window; executing the browser application on the client workstation, with the browser application: responding to text formats to initiate processing specified by the text formats; displaying at least a portion of the document within the browser-controlled window; identifying an embed text format which corresponds to a first location in the document, where the embed text format specifies the location of at least a portion of an object external to the file, where the object has type information associated with it; utilizing the type information to identify and locate an executable application external to the file; and automatically invoking the executable application, in response to the identifying of the embed text format, to execute on the client workstation in order to display the object and enable an end-user to directly interact with the object while the object is being displayed within a display area created at the first location within the portion of the hypermedia document being displayed in the browser-controlled window. " it seems that this patent also covers any dynamic content, or probably any content accessed by a web page that is located on another computer.
TLDR: this patent is a description of one of the fundamental principles of the web. next thing you know they are going to patent "a way to hierarchically store files on a disk"
I thought it was quite witty, are they not among your largest industries? But then I have been temp banned for anti Americanism on this website (which I thought was a little off being that I was paraphrasing an American friend but whatever).
On topic: Best patent troll in ages.
Texas again???? Let me guess... Marshall, Texas? WTF is up with this one place where these patent trolls keep going to file their suits? Can someone say corruption?
The patent system is out of control and needs to be either completely overhauled or just obsoleted. Not sure which will end with the best result.
I thought it was fricking hilarious! Nice to see they aren't afraid to do small digs at americans every once in a while, but if you have a problem with that let's sort it out by biiiiiiiiiiig huuuuuuuuuuugs \(^_^)/ (don't ask, I don't know why I felt the need to say a big hug....)
When I complete this troll the world will at last be MINE!!
Your posts are always entertaining, and always so misinformed.
Anyways, basically what they're saying is they patented the concept of the Web2.0, nice. Considering the technologies (AJAX) they quoted originate from the early 1990s, I have a hard time seeing how the f*ck they got a patent for this in 2002. Also, AJAX and other web technologies were coined by the W3C and last I checked, the W3C is compromised of over 300 companies, including Google, Yahoo, etc etc etc.
I wish software patents could all be destroyed, this is beyond ridiculous.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to brush my bowler hat and clean my monocle. Pip-pip!
see if it was worded like that okay no worries, as for that comment about how porn in the US makes more then the film industry, I never could figure that out considering how much of it you could get for "free" on the internet (which by the way anyone watch the recent episode of Family Guy lol)
anyhow like most of these lawsuits it will either be dismissed or settled outside of court.
+1 this is soo ridiculous. seriously how is it justifiable to make money that easily? patent something that was developped 10years ago and then sue everyone who worked to make it?
:(:(
You mention Texas. Let me explain to you why it is held here. Simply put, its just economics. The whole community over there is living from the patent business. Judges are from the region. Do not forget that judges are chosen in the US. Guess what judges the local community chooses? The ones that are supporting the local economics. This region has grown because of all those weird patent fights. Hotels where build, restaurants etc for the laywers and company people fighting each others wallet.
Then there is the patent:
1) To stimulate innovation
2) Protect the individual
It's flawed...
Right. Let's just end the story there.
patenting *software,* on the other hand, is like patenting a plot device in a novel. "i am going to patent the plot twist where the main antagonist is the protagonists father." see the stupidity of that? it is like saying i am going to write a book, and no one can write a similar book, even if it is entirely original. it is for that reason that i think that software should only be allowed a copyright, and not a patent. copyrights cover duplication, not methodology. with software i can find a different way to do the same thing, and it is not trampling on your IP, if i copy code then it is.
should blizzard have a patent on MMOs? Should Corel (or Star) have a patent on word processing? that is silly. similarly patenting "interactive, dynamic web content" is silly.
this is not to say that patent and copyright laws are fin as is. they are not, and both need a massive overhaul. but we can't just say its borked, throw it all out, since the concept is necessary for progress.
Hahaha thats exactly what I thought. Also this is the most hilarious patent suit I have ever seen.
The patent protects the idea, whereas the R&D budget goes to the implementation. Hence when a company applies for a patent it forbids other companies from implementing it, or coming up with it, without paying a cut. You can patent things that you cant make. You wait for someone to do the work and then you go on an extortion expedition.
You can also patent the bleeding obvious, like the one click buy button. Truth being said the patents discourage innovation. This is proven historically. The industrial revolution worked for the most part without patent laws.
Would anyone consider writing some OFDM digital receiver software (802.11b, 802.11a, 802.16, DSL, DAB, DVB-T, DVB-S) when there are companies stateside that own 3000 patents on them. No matter what you set out to do, you will run afoul of them.
Investors need to invest money to make money. They will invest whether patents exist or not. Banks did finance factories and new businesses during the 1800s when the patent laws were non-existent.
The first patent troll was a lawyer in the USA. This gentleman found penniless people who invented various bits and bobs for cars. He bought their inventions and then sued car manufacturers for his cut. The thing is that he didn't invent anything himself, the defendants had thought of and developed their own bits and bobs. So he contributed nothing to their product. Yet he was asking for a cut, because he had patented the idea. When people act this way towards shops (asking for a cut) its considered a crime, its called extortion and its carries imprisonment sentences.
Having said all that, I sincerely hope that EOLAS gets awarded the maximum amount of damages from each defendant. The IT companies mentioned in the brief have all been awarded numerous frivolous patents, and personally I find it fair and heartwarming to see them on the business end of the barrel :)