It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In August 2009, a Texas jury agreed with i4i, ordering Microsoft to pay $290 million in damages and stop selling Word in the U.S. Although Microsoft appealed that decision, a federal appeals court upheld the judgment on Tuesday, issuing an injunction that bars Microsoft from selling versions of Word that contain the offending patent technology. The court's ruling takes effect on Jan. 11, 2010.
The WordStar word processing program allowed the user to select BOLD off a menu of formatting options. Beheind the scenes it would then insert a BOLD command code into the text. To the user it would look like the word on the screen had turned bold and they would not have to be aware of the code inserted into their text. The system still required the use of explicit control codes for some effects. These codes were ented in a dot format quite similar to the TROFF system.
Originally posted by jimmyx
MSFT is appealing...i4i will probably enter into some type licencing agreement, and recieve some type of payment if they win after all the appeals have been exhausted.
A federal appeals court on Tuesday [December 22, 2009] upheld a lower court's $290 million patent infringement ruling against Microsoft that will prevent the world's largest software maker from selling the current version of its popular Word program.
Originally posted by Johnmike
This is only Word 2007.
And this is for an XML editing system, not (only) for bolding word document text. Your article title is misleading and dishonest. It's a lie, the product of either ignorance or malice.
P.S. Here's the wiki on it: en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by mosesgunner
Why are we talking about this 7 months after it h happened.
Originally posted by EnlightenUp
I suppose Microsoft is simply getting a taste of their own medicine but really this sort of frivolous patenting of things that really are just self-evident and not terribly innovative needs to stop.
Abstract of US 5787449 (A)
A system and method for the separate manipulation of the architecture and content of a document, particularly for data representation and transformations. The system, for use by computer software developers, removes dependency on document encoding technology. A map of metacodes found in the document is produced and provided and stored separately from the document. The map indicates the location and addresses of metacodes in the document. The system allows of multiple views of the same content, the ability to work solely on structure and solely on content, storage efficiency of multiple versions and efficiency of operation.
One early innovation of the PC revolution was the replacement of manually entered dot commands by a menu driven interface. The WordStar word processing program allowed the user to select BOLD off a menu of formatting options. Behind the scenes it would then insert a BOLD command code into the text. To the user it would look like the word on the screen had turned bold and they would not have to be aware of the code inserted into their text. The system still required the use of explicit control codes for some effects, these codes were entered in a dot format quite similar to the TROFF system.
Originally posted by Johnmike
It isn't patenting bolding of text or anything, so I'm guessing that your failure to understand is not malicious but simple ignorance.
Even within the description is acknowledges the prior existence of a WYSIWYG document editor which allows bolding without special coding knowledge:
I question the political or corporate motivations in crying wolf like you are.
A method for producing from a document made up of metacodes and content, a map of metacodes and their addresses of use in association with mapped content of the document and stored in distinct map storage means, the method comprising: (a) reading the content of the document until a metacode is found; (b) copying the content and storing the copied content in a mapped content storage; (c) noting in the map the found metacode and its position in the content; (d) repeating the processing of (a)-(c) until the entire document has been processed; and then (e) providing the document as the content of the document separately from the metacode map of the document.