Judge Says Jury Screwed Up In Awarding Alcatel-Lucent $1.5 Billion From Microsoft For MP3 Patents

from the so-sorry-about-that dept

Mon, Aug 6th 2007 5:56pm — Mike Masnick

Back in February, a jury told Microsoft to pay Alcatel-Lucent $1.5 billion for supposedly violating some patents Alcatel-Lucent held on MP3 technology. The case helped highlight the patent thicket around MP3 technologies, as Microsoft had licensed the technology from the creator of the MP3 technology, Fraunhofer. Back in May, as the judge was considering what to do about the jury's award, Alcatel-Lucent actually claimed that $1.5 billion wasn't enough. It appears the judge not only didn't buy that story, but didn't buy the jury's reasoning either. Today he threw out the jury's ruling, noting that Microsoft doesn't even infringe on one of the patents in question, and the other one is jointly owned by Fraunhofer, and therefore Microsoft has a legitimate license to it already. As the judge said, "The jury's verdict was against the clear weight of the evidence." As you might imagine, Alcatel-Lucent is not happy about this, calling the ruling "shocking and disturbing." So, there is likely going to be a long appeals process. However, this is the second time in recent weeks that we're seeing courts take a more reasonable approach on patents. Hopefully, it's the start of a trend.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: mp3s, patents
Companies: alcatel-lucent, microsoft

15 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 6 Aug 2007 @ 7:11pm

Juror#1: Fuck microsoft
Juror#2: Yeah lets make them pay like a billion dollars LOL
Juror#3: LMAO 1.5 BILLION

case ajourned
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Aug 2007 @ 7:40pm

Juror#4 MacOSX Rules, Microsoft sucks
Juror#5 Unix geeks are the best in bed
Juror#6 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz huh what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Observer, 6 Aug 2007 @ 7:49pm

RE: Anonymous Coward
You need to get a life....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pissed off, 6 Aug 2007 @ 7:49pm

Why don't we just get rid of juries and save us all the hassle?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mors, 6 Aug 2007 @ 11:20pm
  
  Re:
  it is just so much easier to buy off 1 Judge than many jury members.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Aug 2007 @ 7:58pm

admit it Mr. Pissed Off (if that's even your name!)

You just don't enjoy being called in for jury duty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 1:39am

"By a jury of your peers" my ass...
I bet not ONE of those jury members had committed $1.5bn worth of patent infringement.

Damn court system and its lies...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 6:55am

it's a relief to see some reason and judgment being inserted into a process that has reached some impressive heights of ridiculousness. I applaud any judge who rules that just because someone holds a patent on "a covering shaped to fit the foot (below the ankle) with a flexible upper of leather, cloth, or plastic and a sole and heel of heavier material" doesn't mean we should all start going barefoot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bah who needs one, 7 Aug 2007 @ 7:51am

It's nice that we're seeing the courts take a more reasonable view of patents. It's just such a shame that in this case the beneficiary is just about the world's least deserving, most unsympathetic defendant: Microsoft. :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joe Smith, 7 Aug 2007 @ 8:30am
  
  Re: Measure of justice
  It's nice that we're seeing the courts take a more reasonable view of patents. It's just such a shame that in this case the beneficiary is just about the world's least deserving, most unsympathetic defendant: Microsoft. :P
  
  The measure of any justice system is its ability to give the Devil himself a fair trial.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 9:22pm
    
    Re: Re: Measure of justice
    "The measure of any justice system is its ability to give the Devil himself a fair trial."
    
    Wise words. And how many Americans actually belive it?
    
    Pray for our country.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 8:14am

That's balance for you...
The patent system is in serious need of reform and decisions like these are a good start. But if the system is reformed then not only are law abiding corporations (don't laugh I'm sure there's out there somewhere) benifitting but the not so law abiding corporations are benifitting as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 9:05am

why have a juries, if a judge can overrule them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous of Course, 7 Aug 2007 @ 10:31am
  
  Re: why have a juries...
  Window dressing. Image is everything.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Aug 2007 @ 10:54am

Judge Says Jury System Doesn't Work
That about sums it up. Except when poor people are involved. Then juries are just fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]