Featured Articles

Snapdragon 400 is Qualcomm’s SoC for watches, wearables

Snapdragon 400 is Qualcomm’s SoC for watches, wearables

We wanted to learn a bit more about Qualcomm's plans for wearables and it turns out that the company believes its…

More...
Qualcomm sampling 20nm Snapdragon 810

Qualcomm sampling 20nm Snapdragon 810

We had a chance to talk to Michelle Leyden-Li, Senior Director of Marketing, QCT at Qualcomm and get an update on…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

Today we will take a look at the PowerColor TurboDuo Radeon R9 285. The card is based on AMD’s new…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Wednesday, 27 February 2008 07:19

Court of Appeals rules for inventor

Written by David Stellmack
Image

Inventor, 1: Microsoft, 0

A U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sent a case back to the lower court that awarded damages to reconsider those damages. The lower court had ruled the Microsoft Corporation had infringed the patent spreadsheet of its Guatemalan inventor, Carlos Armando Amado, in its Office Suite applications. 

The lower court had awarded $.12 per copy to Amado but had not adequately explained how it arrived at the award or calculated it. At trial a jury ruled that Amado held the patent that links databases and spreadsheets, and that Microsoft had infringed it, awarding Amado $.04 per copy of Microsoft Office sold with the infringing software application. Upon appeal, the lower U.S. District Court tripled the damages to $.12 per copy sold.

Microsoft appealed again, and asked for damages at $.04 per copy; Amado asked for damages of $2.00 per copy. The Court of Appeals did not rule on the proper amount of damages, but sent the case back to the lower court, indicating that the damages should be “somewhere between $.04 and $2.00 per copy.”

And that’s no small award.

Read more here.

Last modified on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 07:39

David Stellmack

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments