Supreme Court to Decide Standard for Proving Invalidity of a Patent

Today the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Microsoft’s appeal in a case that could make it easier to invalidate a patent. If successful, Microsoft’s challenge should help in the fight against bad patents by leveling the playing field for showing that a patent is invalid. A Microsoft win in the case would benefit not only Microsoft, but also the free and open source software community. That’s why EFF, joined by Public Knowledge, the Computer & Communications Industry Association and the Apache Software Foundation, filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting Microsoft.

As we previously reported, here’s some background: In court, parties have to prove their case by some “standard of proof.” In almost all civil cases, the standard is “preponderance of the evidence” – meaning it is more likely than not that the facts are true. When the question is invalidating a patent, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided that a defendant trying to prove a patent invalid must do so by a higher standard than normal civil cases, that of “clear and convincing” evidence. “Clear and convincing” means that the facts are “highly probable,” which is a much more difficult standard to meet than just a preponderance.

In a case three years ago, the Supreme Court had suggested that this high standard of proof should not apply where the prior art involved was not considered by the Patent Office before it issued the patent. Even still, the Federal Circuit has left the clear and convincing evidence standard untouched.

In today’s case, i4i Ltd. had sued Microsoft for patent infringement. i4i claimed its patent covered editing documents that contain markup languages like XML (Microsoft Word had XML editing capabilities). Microsoft had argued that i4i’s patent was invalid because the disclosed invention had been embodied in a software product sold in the United States more than a year before the patent application was filed – prior art that the patent examiner did not consider. The Federal Circuit applied its clear and convincing standard and rejected Microsoft’s invalidity argument. Microsoft petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, and was supported by eleven amicus briefs, including EFF’s. That Court has now granted Microsoft’s request to decide whether the Federal Circuit’s standard of proof rule is correct.

EFF argued in its brief that the Federal Circuit’s requirement that an accused infringer prove patent invalidity by “clear and convincing” evidence unfairly burdens patent defendants, especially in the free and open source software context. The standard undermines the traditional patent bargain between private patent owners and the public and threatens to impede innovation and the dissemination of knowledge. EFF is of course concerned with the effect illegitimate patents have on innovation.

We are pleased that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear Microsoft’s petition, and hope that this case will help to level the patent playing field. Now that the case will be fully briefed, EFF and its other amici will likely file another brief supporting Microsoft. A decision is expected by June 2011.

This article was written by Michael Barclay of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Related Posts

The FBI and Service Provider Wiretapping, or What’s In Your Wallet? The FBI’s apparent desire to require all communications service providers to design a means for law enforcement to access encrypted communications i...
Google’s Lack of Transparency and Openness in the Android Market Will Hurt More Than... The vast open landscape for users, developers, and industry that Google announced with the release of Android has been growing narrower and more opaqu...
Animation in Honeycomb One of the new features ushered in with the Honeycomb release is a new animation system, a set of APIs in a whole new package (android.animation) that...
Why I will not buy Google’s Cr-48 Chrome Notebook The Cr-48 is Google's cloud-based notebook computer. It was announced just this week, and is being made available to a select few. In computer-speak, ...
Some File-Sharers Leave Trails To Their Front Door Following the publication of a paper which investigates how using the same username across multiple web sites may expose Internet users to scammers, T...
Controlling a Computer With Thoughts? Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh have been awarded funding for two projects that will place brain-computer interfaces (BCI) in patients wit...

We Recommend These Vendors and Free Offers

Launch an SSD VPS in Europe, USA, Asia & Australia on Vultr's KVM-based Cloud platform starting at $5:00/month (15 GB SSD, 768 MB of RAM).

Deploy an SSD Cloud server in 55 seconds on DigitalOcean. Built for developers and starting at $5:00/month (20 GB SSD, 512 MB of RAM).

Want to become an expert ethical hacker and penetration tester? Request your free video training course of Online Penetration Testing and Ethical Hacking

Whether you're new to Linux or are a Linux guru, you can learn a lot more about the Linux kernel by requesting your free ebook of Linux Kernel In A Nutshell.


One Comment

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention linux Supreme Court to Decide Standard for Proving Invalidity of a Patent: Today the U.S. Supreme Court agreed ... -- Topsy.com

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*