Title: Eolas Date: 23 Aug 2004 15:33:00 GMT Site: lwv,134.243.216.133
Along with Using Tcl to write WWW client side applications, Eolas [L1 ] is well known for inventing the Web plugin/applet platform, and the associated patent that they're currently enforcing against Microsoft [L2 ].
Developer of the Eolas WebRouser [L3 ] [L4 ], which was cited by Robert X. Cringely as invalidating prior art [L5 ] for the infamous SBC Web patent. Cringely in other columns has written about how Eolas "is mopping the floor" in its judicial encounters with Microsoft, by which he means that the company is winning court cases--maybe big and important ones.
... and has won! [L6 ] (Well, subject to appeal).
The W3C has issued this statement on the subject: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/patent .
And Eolas has issued this response: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1304252,00.asp
In January, 2004, US District Court reaffirms the jury decision against Microsoft: http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,89086,00.html?nlid=AM
In February, 2004, here's a blog discussing the fact that the patent is being reexamined in a prior art claim [L7 ]. These articles [L8 ] [L9 ], however, strongly suggest that the reexamination process will be futile, since the "prior art" that's been claimed was actually presented to the jury in the Microsoft trial.
In March, 2004, the patent claim is "initially-rejected": [L10 ] [L11 ] but the decision may not be final. Actualy, an initial rejection is the routine first step of a patent reexamination. The examiner puts up a straw man, consisting of the arguments presented, in this case, by the W3C, and then the inventor has an opportunity to rebut it. On May 11, 2004, Eolas submitted its rebuttal. [L12 ] [L13 ]
Here's a mid-2004 article providing yet another person's opinion on the current state [L14 ]. Note: this writer testified at the trial, and was thoroughly discredited on the stand as a rabid anti-patent activist.
In August, 2004, things continue to roll along: Slashdot reports that USPTO rejects all 10 patent claims: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/19/0036217 MS files brief asking the infringement judgement be overturned based on Pei Wei's alleged prior art http://news.com.com/Microsoft+appeals+Eolas+decision/2100-1032_3-5228882.html . eWEEK points out that the latest USPTO office action withdraws the rejection of claims which was based upon Berners-Lee's and Raggett's arguments, and cites a new reference that the examiner wants Eolas to respond to: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1638113,00.asp . As a result, the latest action is actually a major victory for Eolas, rather than a Microsoft win as many press reports have suggested.
The Chronicle of Higher Education reports: EOLAS PATENTS REJECTED BY PATENT OFFICE The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has invalidated 10 patents held by the University of California and licensed to Eolas Technologies, confirming a preliminary ruling from the office in March. The patents cover technologies developed by Michael D. Doyle while working at the university; Doyle later started Eolas, which holds an exclusive license to the technology. The technology at issue, which allows Web browsers to automatically launch applications such as Java applets and software plug-ins, is at the heart of a patent-infringement case against Microsoft. A court had awarded the university and Eolas $520 million from Microsoft for using the technology without licensing it, but the decision from the Patent Office could invalidate that ruling. If the patents were upheld, Microsoft and other companies including Adobe and Macromedia would be forced to license the technology or redesign their products to work differently. A spokesperson from the Patent Office said the university will have one more opportunity to convince the office of the legitimacy of the patents. Chronicle of Higher Education, 20 August 2004 (sub. req'd) http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/08/2004082001n.htm
Also see http://www.linuxworld.com/story/46133.htm .
Clif Flynt reported on his work for Eolas at the San Diego conference in 2000.
Michael Doyle is Eolas' CEO.
Steve Ball did a paper with Eolas at a Tcl conference: [L15 ].
Steve Wahl worked for Eolas on the Spynergy Toolkit and related projects.
Dave Roseman, of Eolas, sponsored the development of TclCLIPS
Check out Slashdot for ongoing debates on the subject - such as [L16 ] Computerworld covers Microsoft changing in acknowledgement of the patent: [L17 ]
Jacob Levy Sep 15, 2003: Ray Ozzie of Visicalc and Groove fame [L18 ] thinks he has prior art invalidating Eolas's claim.
But it appears clear that his claims don't hold water: [L19 ], [L20 ] and [L21 ].
Oct 31, 2003: the debate rages on - here are two new c|net articles (at one time, c|net used the Tcl version of Vignette - does it still do that?) [L22 ] [L23 ] http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2003/11/2003111801n.htm