Lots of good IP news around.
If anyone doesn’t know Wendy Chou at Choumedia http://www.choumedia.com/it’s worth checking out her good spot of this news story today that is referenced on her linkedin page. Try this link out http://www.itproportal.com/portal/news/article/2010/5/26/salesforce-ceo-hits-out-patent-troll-microsoft/
How to make sense of this one?
Well, several years ago, Microsoft was the perennial patent loser. Sued by small patent holding companies and licensing organisations, Microsoft was an easy target. Huge revenues, and little to fight back with being a late entrant to the patent game. It is almost a surprise that they didn’t lose more spectacularly more often.
But with the hiring of ex IBM head of IP, Marshall Phelps, the outsider view was that Microsoft was aiming to fight back and not only protect its own key inventions but also to turn IP into a profit centre. I’ve heard tell of their ICE (I think it stood for Intellectual Capital Expansion) program where engineers worldwide were stimulated into intensive patenting activity. Microsoft became reportedly one of the largest filers worldwide, and one of its largest buyers of patents alongside Intellectual Ventures, a Microsoft venture that’s worth a read about too.http://www.intellectualventures.com/Home.aspx
Marshall has since gone but maybe this is part of his legacy, a new generation of Microsoft patents that have a useful side effect of being able to be out-licensed. Although Mark Benioff is expressing surprise at Microsoft’s actions, his legal and IP team have probably, if not certainly, known about this for a while but have refused to pay. Microsoft has little choice if it’s going to develop a good IP reputation but to litigate or nobody will take it seriously.
Typical US style litigation and licensing tactics in essence, just with the names changed and the poacher becoming (at least for this litigation) the gamekeeper.
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.tangible-ip.com/drmhstnstll/wp-content/themes/thesis/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
It’s ridiculous to describe Microsoft as a patent troll. A patent troll is, by definition, a non-practicing patent holder which exploits its total immunity from patent counter-suits to blackmail the innovative companies that actually do stuff.
Now I’m no fan of Microsoft, but they do practice, and as such are vulnerable to patent infringement suits themselves. Their suit may or may not be frivolous, without merit, or vexatious—I don’t know— but patent trolling it most certainly is not.
Andre. Good comment. Where on your scale of trolls does the lone inventor, ie the person that invents the originating technology but not the successful product, sit? A troll or not?