In My Experience... | Understanding the Eolas plugin patent. (1389)

It didn't happen on TV. « prev
A wireless architecture for getting an Xbox online. » next

Understanding the Eolas plugin patent.
[ Posted by Dan on September 12, 2003 | 6 Comments ]

The subject of this post is a bit misleading, because I don't exactly understand the Eolas patent. This post is an attempt at grokking the situation.

First, Eolas claims that Microsoft "had stolen browser technology relating to plug-ins." this is, of course, a pretty vague statement. Then consider Microsoft's citation of CNN as being "an example of a site that uses Macromedia Flash--a technology many consider particularly vulnerable to the patent's claims--in a non-infringing way."

Is it the browser implementation that infringes, or the web site implementation that infringes? I'm not sure, but the Eolas patent is described by Eolas thusly...

First demonstrated publicly in 1993, this invention lifted the glass for the first time from the hypermedia browser, enabling Web browsers for the first time to act as platforms for fully-interactive embedded applications. The patent covers Web browsers that support such currently popular technologies as ActiveX components, Java applets, and Navigator plug-ins. Eolas' advanced browser technology makes possible rich interactive online experiences for over 500 million Web users, worldwide.

In the patent abstract, the following line indicates to me (a non-lawyer to be sure) that the devil is in the web site implementation...

The program object is embedded into a hypermedia document much like data objects.

Now, back to the CNN implementation and the way Microsoft suggests that web developers can avoid infringing code. It goes something like this...

One such option would move the data to the Web page itself, rather than pulling it from an external source.

If you haven't read the description of the CNN method, then go read it now... Notice any similarities? I do, and it's a very annoying process, that basically makes the data load external, but not external at the same time.

Anyone else have a clearer idea of what the deal is here?

C|Net reports on changes to the HTML spec as it relates to the Eolas spec.

The potential problem for HTML is that it describes a way of summoning content located on a server other than the one serving the page in question. The "object" and "embed" tags in HTML, consortium members worry, may fall under the wording of the Eolas patent.

-Posted by Dan on September 22, 2003 09:47 AM

Here's a page at MSFT describing the user experience after they have "fixed" Ie to not infringe. One word: BLEH.

-Posted by Dan on October 7, 2003 01:34 PM

Just found a tool for updating the entire website according to the new IE requirements. Works fast, converted about 400 pages on my website withing 5 seconds. and easy to use, too.

Right here:
http://www.hotspotsdesign.com/siteupdater/

-Posted by Jack on October 14, 2003 10:10 PM

Tim Berners-Lee has sent a letter to the US Patent office regarding the patent urging the office to review the patent.

The enormous expense and the more general threat the '906 patent poses to the Web community is completely unwarranted because the '906 patent is, we firmly believe, invalid in view of the prior art described in our filing to the Patent Office under the authority of 35 U.S.C. Section 301.

-Posted by Dan on October 30, 2003 01:39 PM

The patent office is reviewing the patent.

PTO Deputy Commissioner Stephen Kunin ordered the review after Internet engineers said the patent did not cover an original invention and would cause massive disruption for Web users, spokeswoman Brigid Quinn said.

-Posted by Dan on November 21, 2003 04:35 PM

Here's another update (Jan 14, 2004)...

A Chicago federal judge on Wednesday upheld a $521 million patent verdict against Microsoft that could ultimately force major changes in many of the most common Internet software products.

-Posted by Dan on January 16, 2004 08:36 PM

Comment posting has been turned off because I don't have enough time and will to deal with the constant comment spamming. I'm very sorry and will fix this sometime soon (soon = before 2004 ends).