While I can’t see Internet Explorer 7 shipping with something like this in it without it being to the detriment of not only Microsoft, but the entire internet, I thought I’d point it out nonetheless as an example of what lawsuits can do in the world we live in today:
As some might remember, in 2004 Microsoft lost a lawsuit to Eolas Technologies concerning a patent for “Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document” #
Flash, Quicktime and Movies now have to be ‘clicked’ before they will be enabled on IE 7. Confused as to what that means exactly? Thomas Baekdal has the lowdown for you. (via Kottke).
The thing is, this isn’t just an IE issue, if this gets to live out the life Eolas would like, it’ll affect everyone using the net today, as the Wikipedia article on Eolas states:
After the 2003 judgment, awarding Eolas $521m from Microsoft for infringement of Eolas patent, in October 2003 Microsoft proposed a change to its Internet Explorer browser in an attempt to avoid having to pay license fees to Eolas. Other browsers such as Opera, Mozilla Firefox and Apple’s Safari might have to implement a similar change to avoid infringement, or to license Eolas’ patent. A decision to change the browsers, rather than to license the patent, would force a disruption in the normal functioning of millions of existing unmaintained web pages that use multimedia plug-ins, and would cause ripple effects through the web, causing re-design of tens of millions web pages that are currently being maintained. #
So I went to Eolas about page, a 1996-like relic I might add, complete with animated gif headers, you’ll be treated to the following:
Vision: To create and develop the inventions that allow information technologies to enhance the quality of life for everyone.
Thank you Eolas. Thank you for ‘enhancing’ the quality of life for me and everyone… everyone around me.
God, I hate that crap. Patents and stuff like that ruin so much.
This has the potential to really break down the business where I work ( Titoonic ) since doing Flash work for the web is a large part of our business.
I still firmly believe this’ll never see the light of day, and these IE7 decisions are just saber-rattling towards EOLAS.
If it did happen, however, I think it’ll only be months before the patent is declared void.
Eolas are milking the patent angle for all their worth. Given they have no real product of their own, just like SCO, it’s the bully-by-patent method for them.
If the patent is upheld (which, against Microsoft it effectively already has) then it can be upheld again.
It’s almost comical that a supposed patent holder for various multimedia uses has a website that looks like it had the life sucked out of it 4 years ago..
Cool, so my comment didn’t stick. Lets try again.
Eolas and pulling a SCO, that is all. Attempting to milk patent and IP rights for all their worth.
While they may have bullied Microsoft into coughing up, it’s not all over red rover just yet.
Anti-flash-block plugin anyone?
You can use FlashObject to get around the whole click-to-play step:
http://blog.deconcept.com/flashobject/
From what I’ve read, you just need to replace the and tags with javascript and everything will work as normal
I beg to differ. It is not the notion of patent and, making assumptions about your intent here, copyright that is flawed; it is how they are being applied.
If you created a unique mechanical object, such as Lego or a revolutionary blood filtering machine, you should be allowed a patent to benefit from all the investment you have put in. Similarly, if you write a book, you should be allowed to benefit from it. Patents and copyright are fantastic tools that attract people towards innovation and creation.
But slowly those tools have acquired a different meaning for many corporations. Patents and copyright have been extended to allow the original creators undue benefit, and the tools seem to lose their meaning, in that they no longer promote innovation (because you are rewarded for work), but stifle it (because the exclusivity goes on for too long and they are allowed for ideas – software algorithms – as oppose to implementations only)
Patents and copyright are wonderful tools, as long as they apply to something solid (and not ideas) and only apply for a limited time (and not 75+ years)
The way I see it, patents were made for a time when the world moved much more slowly in terms of technological progress. Seems to me they would function as intended, and therefore function much better, if they lasted only 5 or so years, rather than 20 or whatever it is now.
Same thing for copyright, really – it could do with being halved in time duration and we would all benefit greatly. Even those who worry most about what they’d lose shouldn’t worry too much. I can’t see anyone going to a Mickey Mouse World themepark that isn’t put together by Disney, etc.
isn’t $541M enough? it’s not a patent issue anymore. it’s all about greed!
Just one more ‘yes to all’ box to click when you are trying to run internet explorer…at least thats probably the way the lawyers would see it.
@AkaXakA: Flashblock plugin (at least for Firefox).
Someone’s really got to do something about this broken patent system… take, for example, some obscure web company that patented the underlying concepts of AJAX. People should be thankful they haven’t started license fees (yet).
I prefer clicking on crap like that to get it started — less movement = less distraction. :D
Patents are getting ridiculous when there are companies that exist that do nothing but research things that currently don’t have patents, and then file for them.
Also, is it an urban legend or is it true that Microsoft filed for, and got, a patent for the double-click of a mouse? [checks Wikipedia] Yep – here it is.
Patents serve a real purpose, but as others have stated, the system is broken. I think I’m going to check to see if inhaling and exhaling has a patent yet…I will charge all of you for the right to license your breathing! I’ll be richer than Bill Gates and Steve Jobs combined!
Mwahahhahahahahahahahhaaaaaaaa!
I think Eolas have given an “automatic” license to open-source browsers, but that’s not really the point is it?
Michael Chrighton makes some interesting points in this article.
Damm Microsoft. There, I’ve said my part. I sure told them…..
…which breaks accessibility guidelines. (Not that Flash doesn’t often as well, but while I’m being a curmudgeon I thought I’d mention it.)
That’s so sad, with this lawsuit we’re just taking a step backwards in the world of web technology, who the hell wants to code javascript just to embed a quicktime movie?
I agree with DOm it is all about greed
Not if you do it properly. FlashObject (for example) adds flash over default content if both Flash and DOM JS are available. That content is still available for screenreaders I believe. Not perfect by any means, but better than nowt.
Bjorn, to follow up on what you wrote, I think you are right that ideas should not be patentable, but I think it should be extended so it would be harder to be awarded patents – also, you should be able to patent anything without being able to prove beyond doubt that you had put a lot of research into it.
Simply put, if your invention is the result of hundreds or thousands of hours of expensive research, you should be able to patent it, but if it’s something that took you 10 minutes to think up and another hour to design, it’s not hard enough to come by to be able to patent it.
I do realize all the administrative problems this would present, but I don’t think it’s less than the current system (if they actually did their jobs, instead of just awarding patents right and left).
Still, I can’t help but wonder if it wouldn’t just be better for everyone patents simply didn’t exist, so everyone could build on each others work with no inhibition.