Microsoft unbowed in face of 'stop XP' lawsuit

NEWS Microsoft has dismissed a massive intellectual property claim by digital rights company Intertrust as a "fishing expedition". Intertrust yesterday broadened the scope of its legal action against Microsoft, and is now seeking an injunction to stop the sale of XP, due to be launched on 25 October. Intertrust alleges Microsoft violated seven of its patents with at least 50 separate infringements, covering .NET, Windows XP, Windows ME, Office XP, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Reader and Microsoft Digital Asset Server. A Microsoft spokeswoman today dismissed the lawsuit as a clear case of fishing for a target when no obvious infringements had taken place. She said: "Whilst we will respond appropriately as per any legal requirements, it is clear from their filings they have no understanding of what .NET is all about." Microsoft is not thought to be concerned that the escalation of the lawsuit will affect next week's launch of its new operating system, XP. Intertrust claims XP, along with .NET and Microsoft's Media Player, are using security technology that has been prototyped and successfully patented by Intertrust. In addition to stopping the sale of the offending items, Intertrust is also seeking unspecified damages. Ed Fish, president of Intertrust's utility division, said Intertrust was just trying to get Microsoft to admit it had learnt a lesson. "We want them to respect what they've learnt and respect our rights, and compensate us for them." He said Intertrust had taken a narrow view of the possible infringements by Microsoft, and that the software giant actually infringed in "many, many more ways" than mentioned in the court filing. However, some industry pundits agree with Microsoft's assessment. One, who wished to remain anonymous, said the lawsuit was a result of Intertrust having failed to find enough customers for its software. "Intertrust has a lot of intellectual property, but not as many customers. In this case litigation may be a more attractive route for them," he said. Fish denied this, saying: "We have an obligation to our shareholders to realise the value of our assets. Look at IBM, which gets over $1bn a year from patent licenses - many successful companies also have revenue from their patents. It would be irresponsible of us not to look out for this."