Microsoft patents XML word processing documents
Summary
The patent would appear to cover all usage of XML and XSDs in word processing document, which would effectively leave all other modern word processors - and other software that used their documents - liable to licensing by the company.
Topics
The US patent office has granted a Microsoft patent application, 7,571,169, which "... is directed at providing a word-processing document in a native XML file format that may be understood by an application that understands XML, or to enable another application or service to create a rich document in XML so that the word-processing application can open it as if it was one of its own documents. "
The patent, filed in December 2004 and granted on August 4 2009, specifies that this is done using an XML Schema Document (XSD), which contains more information about the document's formatting, and also covers systems that can open the document without using the original word processing software.
Both XML and XML Schema are long-established open standards, designed to do exactly this, among many other functions.
The patent also specifies that the document can contain formatting information such as line, paragraph and page breaks, font styles and sizes, and other standard components of text documents.
Within the patent, Microsoft has included a list of over a hundred references to books, articles, patents and other software that bear on XML usage in word processing.
On the face of it, the patent would appear to cover all usage of XML and XSDs in word processing document, which would effectively leave all other modern word processors - and other software that used their documents - liable to licensing by the company.
This article was originally posted on ZDNet UK.
Talkback Most Recent of 216 Talkback(s)
-
Property List Editor
How would this patent relate to Apple's already existing Property List Editor application, a Developer Tool for editing "plist files" written in XML (along with any other XML files that might wander onto a Mac without being a .plist file)?
grscjo37th Aug 2009 -
The US patent system is ridiculous
Nobody can make a word processor now that uses XML and XSD? Good Lord, what if we did that with all of our applications?
bmonsterman7th Aug 2009 -
MS would patent breathing if they could get away with it.
There is no level too low for them to stoop.
fr0thy27th Aug 2009 -
Sorry,
the state of NJ has already taken that one, along with the taxation of the air.
Erroneous7th Aug 2009 -
I once lived there...
they have to charge by volume, because they couldn't generate much off of quality.
Sorry... couldn't resist, now back to the subject...
ShadowGIATL9th Aug 2009 -
You act as though...
Microsoft is the only company that does this.
Who invented the TV? Wasn't RCA, who fought Philo Taylor Farnsworth for the patent and with a 50 million dollar patent suit. Why? Because they thought of it first. However, Philo Farnsworth created the working version for which the patent was issued.
Big corporations will always fight for patents to avoid royalties. It is in their best interest, whether you agree with it or not.
It's the nature of business.ShadowGIATL9th Aug 2009 -
It's the nature of today's business....
...the robber barons of the 1800's said: "It is how capitalism works and how mankind acquires progress..." Nonsense...
The brought onto us the great depression of the 1920's and World War I and II...
In real terms, the U.S. Patent system is broken, and needs fixing.
This as well as other stuff really created the Great Recession... it wasn't housing or NINJAs... that's the story every bank wants to tell you...
cosuna10th Aug 2009 -
RE: No one
In most countries a patent can only be granted if a technology can be shown to b 'not already in the public domain'. To some that is the very definition of 'open'.
XML is an open standard, the purpose of which is to create documents (of all kinds). What Microsoft has done is to patent the use of doing something with a particular tool, akin to patenting the use of a paint brush and paint to paint a house.
There are many word processors that used XML to format documents long before Microsoft made the application. The application should have been denied, however, it has no real meaning as it does not affect the use of XML to format text in document management systems, content management systems or page formatting suites (dtp).
The main problem with your view point is that many people come up with the same idea at the same time. Intellectual Property laws may be intended to protect the entity who comes up with an idea (mainly the company th hard worker works for) but mainly has the affect of ham stringing innovation. They also tie up a lot of resources that are needed in times like now... but thats another discussion.
zdnet@...11th Aug 2009 -
Right, RCA was constantly in court...
fighting anyone who had patented a circut that would stablize any function in a TV. What RCA didn't already have, they would sue the REAL inventor until the patent holder went bankrupt and/or couldn't collect royalties.
sykandtyed10th Aug 2009 -
But if you stop them...
you still have to stop all the others that do it as well. Good luck.
Did I say it was right? Nah... just saying that is business as usual.ShadowGIATL11th Aug 2009 -
But the Apple Corp....
Would gladly trademark the term "Apple", banning any reference to the word that didn't reference their company (heaven forbid either the apple farmers, or the record label that produced the Beatles) if they could get away with it.
Before you get all Anti-MS, look at when the patent was applied for. It may have been approved of 2009, but the application was submitted 2004. For flaws, look instead to the US patent system which has still not caught up with the times!
kaninelupus10th Aug 2009 -
Apple is a licensee of the word
Apple is already owned by the Beatles (Apple Records). Apple computer got their permission to use it as long as Apple Computer didn't get into the music business, thereby competing with Apple Records.
cholzwarth10th Aug 2009 -
Is iTunes in the music buisness?
I think they may have over stepped as well.
Even if MS has the patent, it depends on how they use it. They may just want the patent so they can use that type of file and not have to worry about someone else patenting it. If that happened, wouldn't they be the ones that got burnt. This may simply be CYA.
mjolnar@...10th Aug 2009 -
Technically no.
iTunes is a distribution platform. The agreement stated that Apple stay out of the music business... i.e. the business of making music. They are free to engage in music distribution.ShadowGIATL10th Aug 2009 -
Patent for free utilisation?
I don't know much about US patent law, but I'd expect that you do not abuse a patent once you can proof you used the technique before the patent was applied for.
That in mind, I am sure MS wants to make money out of it by sub-licensing and their own products!
JanEnEml11th Aug 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
