Microsoft Patents XML

[tonyh]

I know there is an existing XML forum, but I felt it would be more suited here for discussion. And since many of you are pro-open source via Firefox as well as die hard W3C enthusiats, I thought this would be appropriate.

Now before I cause any hesterics, I do not believe that Microsoft has patented the file format itself, only the conversion to and from. A couple of articles: Zdnet UK (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39200357,00.htm) and Geek.com (http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2005May/gee20050527030661.htm). In related news MS has stated that XML will be used as the new file format for Office 12 (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1822667,00.asp) and in a rare turn of events (due to the so called 'copycatting' of OSX by Longhorn) so will Apple (http://blogs.msdn.com/rick_schaut/archive/2005/06/01/424086.aspx).

What I want to know is how will this change web development? I don't think it will affect the webauthor who creates XML files in notepad; but, you never know where MS will take the courts with this because if MS can patent one open standard who's to say that can't patent others? I am certain that this will affect how web developers can display xml content based on database, spreadsheets, ect, as an extreme maybe even (X)HTML. What about XML 2.0, as well as XSLT 1 and 2?

[Stephen Philbin]

Surely this can't be right? I heard the goons were working on a proprietary AXML (Advanced XML), it had better be that.

[tonyh]

Surely this can't be right? I heard the goons were working on a proprietary AXML (Advanced XML), it had better be that.
I'm not sure. I do know that the initial patent request was in 2001, so it did take 4 years in order for it to be approved. At this point I'm more inclided to say that AXML was in development if the patent failed, after all why create an all new propietray format when you can assimilate a well established existing one?

But as I said, I believe this patent only applies to the conversion to and from xml files, and not the xml file format itself. I'm sure that AXML will eventually be applied to their file formats such as docx, xlsx and pptx (sp?) in hopes to improve code and file size. Of course it will probably be pushed for web development as well with programs like FrontPage, Dreamweaver and GoLive. Yet further filling the web with non standards compliant tag soup.

[Stephen Philbin]

Aye, I've just read the articles and I have to say I am absolutely f***ing disgusted. They can't own the standard themselves, so they just cut off its oxygen instead. They have no right to any patents related to XML in any way at all, neither does anyone else. And people wonder why programs are designed with the intention of destroying Windows software.

[the tree]

XML is a way of presenting infomation, so any patent on it wouldn't stand up in Europe.
http://www.european-patent-office.org/legal/epc/e/ar52.html
and as it's based on SGML, it should belong to the w3c anyway.

[NogDog]

The patent is not for XML, but for a way to convert software objects into XML text, and vice versa. Still questionable to me as to whether it warrants a patent, but not as bad as the title of this thread would lead you to believe.

[Stephen Philbin]

No it isn't for XML its self, but it does cover just about all sensible use of it.

[ray326]

No it isn't for XML its self, but it does cover just about all sensible use of it.
It's also "obvious" in general and a big outfit that wanted to fight it could probably get it revoked. The other big users are Sun and IBM and they're cross-licensed up the yinyang with MS and each other so no problem there. Of couse the little guys and open source guys are being screwed left and right by the idiots currently inhabiting the USPTO but that's just status quo.

[tonyh]

The patent is not for XML, but for a way to convert software objects into XML text, and vice versa.
I stated this in my first post.

Still questionable to me as to whether it warrants a patent, but not as bad as the title of this thread would lead you to believe.
Lol. Too true, but in the field of reporting the title is what gains the most attention :D .

No it isn't for XML its self, but it does cover just about all sensible use of it.
This is more akin to why I created this thread. Even if MS doesn't own the file format itself in one sense they control how xml files can be created. For example, someone creates a document in OpenOffice unfortunately now there is a concern on whether or not that document can be saved (ie .doc to .xml) with out violating MS's patent. The only thing I can think of that can avoid any conversion factor would to create the document as an xml file and maintain the file format throughout the project. However, I'm sure all of you can see the pitfalls of this approach, mind you it appears that OpenDocument (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,,1819239,00.asp) is attempting just that.

It's also "obvious" in general and a big outfit that wanted to fight it could probably get it revoked. The other big users are Sun and IBM and they're cross-licensed up the yinyang with MS and each other so no problem there. Of couse the little guys and open source guys are being screwed left and right by the idiots currently inhabiting the USPTO but that's just status quo.
Some of the articles I have read state that Sun and IBM aren't exactly happy with the patent either. The problem here is whether or not a 'big outfit' is willing to go to court over this as I'm sure MS can drag this out like they do every other case. It's a question of how much resources a company is willing to use to have the patent revoked, or if it's easier to allow MS to eat their cake. In the article linked above for Office 12, it does state that MS is going to allow access to their xml file formats royalty-free, so maybe they'll do the same for conversion. Which makes you wonder why the patent was requested in the first place. Perhaps MS will simply allow free conversions, provided MS propietary formats are used. It would be one way to put a strangle hold on competition.

I'm just curious on how this will affect IE7 (http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/)'s future compliance with XML technologies, whether they are going to go the route of propietary or W3C. I feel this may become a case of MS vs W3C, yet again, in regards to future standards compliance, a "our way or their way, just remember we control 80+% of your consumer base."

[ray326]

Some of the articles I have read state that Sun and IBM aren't exactly happy with the patent either.That's probably more on philosophical grounds than anything that's directly effecting them. Of course they're also looking at all the obvious and "covered by prior art" crap MS has been given patents for recently and I'm sure that's hacking them off, too. Here's yet one more bit of idiocy out of the USPTO they may have to waste money on. I can see it really rubbing IBM the wrong way because they're essentially the inventors of XML in the first place.

[MstrBob]

The patent pointed to, no 6,901,431, from what I read, is about a customized, web-based voice application utilizing XML. The patent covers the aspects of operation for a program to work with the XML file and select from it personalized settings for the current user. Though I'm no lawyer, I've yet to see where Microsoft Patents using XML documents in applications. I'm not one to defend microsoft, but it just looks like MS is patenting a new application, or perhaps some new feature to add to Internet Explorer. And if the article is correct, then that means that MS patented converting a programming object into XML. This in no way means "We can't use XML!!!!" and would have no affect on a lot of web-programming languages using XML. Storing an object in an XML file is a process I wouldn't be surprised to see patented, but I didn't see that in the patent. Unless it's obscured by thick legal jargon.

[tonyh]

I'm not one to defend microsoft, but it just looks like MS is patenting a new application, or perhaps some new feature to add to Internet Explorer. And if the article is correct, then that means that MS patented converting a programming object into XML. This in no way means "We can't use XML!!!!"
Of course, I've never stated that webdevelopers could not use XML, I was curious on how this patent could (if any) affect web development. Generally, it appears that it won't affect us at all. I also thought that this patent was simply for a particular way for files to be converted too, as you mentioned, most likely for a propietary program.

And I must be blind, as I should have known this was going to happen, but apparently the new royalty-free licenses of MS XML file formats will not be compatible with GNU licenses (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1829355,00.asp). More or less pitting the MS propietary formats agains the new OpenDocument formats linked above. The question is which format will be accepted by major companies, or will it become who ever supports both will lead the competition?