Eolas

In September 1995, the founders of Eolas released WebRouser, an advanced Web browser based on Mosaic that implemented plugins, client-side image maps, web-page-defined browser buttons and menus, embedded streaming media, and cloud computing capabilities.{{cite press release

| title = Eolas releases WebRouser via the Internet

| url = http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1995q3/0566.html

}} In 2005, Eolas released 'Muse', a "multimedia doodling application," which it later licensed to Iconicast LLC, to use as the basis for an iOS app called 'HueTunes'. The HueTunes app was featured at the DEMO conference in 2013.{{cite news|url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2225587/10-great-videos-from-demo-fall-2013.html|title=10 great videos from DEMO Fall 2013|author=Keith Shaw|date=17 October 2013|work=NETWORKWORLD|access-date=13 October 2020|archive-date=14 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201014203236/https://www.networkworld.com/article/2225587/10-great-videos-from-demo-fall-2013.html|url-status=dead}} In 2012, Eolas developed the Einstein Brain Atlas iPad app for the National Museum of Health and Medicine Chicago,{{cite news |url=https://gizmodo.com/5946402/nmhmc-harvey-check-out-einsteins-crazy-brain|title=NMHMC Harvey -- Check out Einstein's Crazy Brain|author=Mario Aguilar|date=25 September 2012|work=Gizmodo}} which was named the Gizmodo App of the Day. According to the Eolas Web site, their current products include two health-education systems: the AnatLab Visible Human, used to teach gross anatomy to medical students, and AnatLab Histology, an iOS and Android app that provides mobile access to a complete collection of ultra-high-resolution histology microscopic slide images.

{{Expand section|date=October 2007}}

US patent 5,838,906,{{cite patent|country=US|number=5838906|pubdate=1998-11-17|title=Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document|assign1=The Regents of the University of California|inventor1-last=Doyle|inventor1-first=Michael D.|inventor2-last=Martin|inventor2-first=David C.|inventor3-last=Ang|inventor3-first=Cheong S.}} titled "Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document," was filed on October 17, 1994 and granted on November 17, 1998.

In Autumn 2003, the inventor of the World Wide Web and the Director of the W3C Consortium Tim Berners-Lee wrote to the Under Secretary of Commerce, asking for this patent to be invalidated, in order to "eliminate this major impediment to the operation of the Web". Leaders of Open Source Community sided with Microsoft in fighting the patent due to its threat to the free nature of the Web and to the basic established HTML standards. The specific concerns of having one company (Eolas) controlling a critical piece of the Web framework were cited.

In March 2004, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) re-examined and initially rejected the patent. Eolas submitted a rebuttal in May 2004. On September 27, 2005, the USPTO upheld the validity of the patent. The PTO ruling rejected the relevance of Pei Wei's Viola code to the Eolas patent. According to the University of California press release, "In its 'Reasons for Patentability/Confirmation' notice, the patent examiner rejected the arguments for voiding UC's previously approved patent claims for the Web-browser technology as well as the evidence presented to suggest that the technology had been developed prior to the UC innovation. The examiner considered the Viola reference the primary reference asserted by Microsoft at trial as a prior art publication and found that Viola does 'not teach nor fairly suggest that instant 906 invention, as claimed.'"{{cite press release

|publisher = University of California

|date = 2005-09-28

|title = U.S. Patent Office reaffirms University's Web-browser technology patent

|url = http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/2005/sep28.html

|access-date = 2009-10-08

|url-status = dead

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20091011223032/http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/2005/sep28.html

|archive-date = 2009-10-11

}}

Eolas was granted a second patent in October 2009 related to the same technology.{{cite patent|country=US|number=7599985|pubdate=2009-10-06|title=Distributed hypermedia method and system for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document|assign1=The Regents of the University of California|inventor1-last=Doyle|inventor1-first=Michael|inventor2-last=Martin|inventor2-first=David|inventor3-last=Ang|inventor3-first=Cheong}}{{cite news

| title = Eolas sues corporate giants over Web technology

| first = Stephen

| last = Shankland

| url = http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10368638-264.html

| publisher = CBS Interactive

| date = 2009-10-06

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}

After considering the evidence asserted at the 2012 trial, including Viola, the US Patent Office granted Eolas a new patent in November 2015 with claims which generally cover cloud computing on the Web.{{cite patent|country=US|number=9195507|pubdate=2015-11-24|title=Distributed hypermedia method and system for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document|assign1=Eolas Technologies Inc.|inventor1-last=Doyle|inventor1-first=Michael D.|inventor2-last=Martin|inventor2-first=David C.|inventor3-last=Ang|inventor3-first=Cheong S.}}

All of the above patents had expired by September 2017.{{cite web |last1=Doyle |first1=Michael D. |last2=Martin |first2=David C. |last3=Ang |first3=Cheong S. |title=Distributed hypermedia method and system for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document |url=https://patents.google.com/patent/US9195507B1/en?oq=US9195507+(B1) |access-date=25 July 2022 |date=24 November 2015}}

Microsoft declined to license the technology when it was offered to them (and others) in 1994.{{cite web

| title = Questions and Answers about UC/Eolas patent infringement suit against Microsoft

| url = http://www.ucop.edu/news/archives/2003/aug11art1qanda.htm

| publisher = University of California

| access-date = 2009-10-08

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20091012111542/http://www.ucop.edu/news/archives/2003/aug11art1qanda.htm

| archive-date = 2009-10-12

| url-status = dead

}}

In 1999, Eolas filed suit in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Microsoft over validity and use of the patent. Eolas won the initial case in August 2003 and was awarded damages of ${{Formatprice|521000000|3}} from Microsoft for infringement. The District Court reaffirmed the jury's decision in January 2004.

In June 2004, Microsoft appealed the case to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In March 2005, the District Court judgment was remanded, but the infringement and damages parts of the case were upheld. The appeals court ruled that the two Viola-related exhibits that had been thrown out of the original trial needed to be shown to a jury in a retrial. Microsoft quickly filed for a rehearing.

In October 2005, the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear Microsoft's appeal, leaving intact the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in favor of Eolas with respect to foreign sales of Microsoft Windows. However, the remand to District Court had not been heard yet.

In May 2007, the USPTO agreed to allow Microsoft to argue ownership of the patent after they reissued a Microsoft patent that covers the same concepts as outlined in the Eolas patent, and contains wording that mirrors the Eolas patent.{{cite news

| title = USPTO gives Microsoft chance to overturn Eolas browser plug-in patent

| first = Eric

| last = Bangeman

| url = https://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070531-uspto-gives-microsoft-chance-to-overturn-eolas-browser-plug-in-patent.html

| publisher = Condé Nast Digital

| date = 2007-05-31

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}{{cite news

| title = Microsoft gets OK to stake claim for interactivity patent

| url = http://www.seattlepi.com/business/317739_msftpatent30.html

| publisher = Hearst Seattle Media

| date = 2007-05-30

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}

The USPTO ruled in favor of Eolas on that matter in September 2007.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}}

Microsoft and Eolas agreed in July 2007 to delay a pending re-trial, in order to negotiate a settlement. On August 27, 2007, Eolas reported to its shareholders that a settlement had been reached and that Eolas expected to pay a substantial dividend as a result; the exact amount and terms of the settlement were not disclosed.{{cite news

| title = High-profile, 8-year patent dispute settled

| url = http://www.seattlepi.com/business/329766_msfteolas31.html

| publisher = Hearst Seattle Media

| date = 2007-08-30

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}

In October 2009, Eolas sued a number of large corporations for infringement of the same patent. The 22 sued corporations include Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, Argosy Publishing, Blockbuster, CDW Corp., Citigroup, eBay, Frito-Lay, The Go Daddy Group, Google, J.C. Penney Co. Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., New Frontier Media Inc., Office Depot Inc., Perot Systems Corp., Playboy Enterprises International Inc., Rent-A-Center Inc., Staples Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc., Texas Instruments Inc., Yahoo! Inc., and YouTube LLC.{{cite news

| title = Eolas Technologies Files Infringement Lawsuit

| url = http://www.marketwatch.com/story/eolas-technologies-files-infringement-lawsuit-2009-10-06

| publisher = The Wall Street Journal

| date = 2009-10-06

| access-date = 2009-11-08

}} Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, writing in Computerworld's opinion section, called Eolas a patent troll after these lawsuits were initiated.{{cite web|first=Steven J. |last=Vaughan-Nichols |url=http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9139150/Opinion_Eolas_might_just_sue_every_last_lousy_company_in_creation |title=Opinion: Eolas might just sue every last, lousy company in creation |publisher=Computerworld |date=October 8, 2009 |access-date=February 11, 2012}} As of June 2011, a number of these companies, including Texas Instruments, Oracle and JPMorgan Chase have signed licensing deals with Eolas, while others are still litigating.

In February 2012, a Texas jury found that some of the claims in two of Eolas' patents were invalid after testimony from several defendants including Tim Berners-Lee and Pei-Yuan Wei, credited as creator of the Viola browser. The testimony professed that the Viola browser included Eolas' claimed plugin invention before their conception date (September 7, 1993). There is "substantial evidence that Viola was publicly known and used" before the plaintiffs' alleged conception date, it added. The ruling effectively ended a pending lawsuit against Yahoo, Google, Amazon and JC Penney.{{cite news|last=Samuels|first=Julie|title=Why the Patent System Doesn't Play Well with Software: If Eolas Went the Other Way|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/02/why-patent-system-doesnt-play|newspaper=Electronic Frontier Foundation|date=February 15, 2012}}

On July 23, 2013, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has nationwide jurisdiction, affirmed a Texas federal court which had ruled in July 2012 that several claims relating to the two patents in the suit were invalid, a ruling which Eolas had appealed.{{cite news|title=Patent firm Eolas loses appeal in Web lawsuit against 22 companies |url=http://www.techcentral.ie/22212/patent-firm-eolas-loses-appeal-in-web-lawsuit-affecting-22-companies#ixzz2ZuqJ8BbH |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130724010241/http://www.techcentral.ie/22212/patent-firm-eolas-loses-appeal-in-web-lawsuit-affecting-22-companies%23ixzz2ZuqJ8BbH#ixzz2ZuqJ8BbH |url-status=dead|publisher=TechCentral.ie |date=July 23, 2013 |archive-date=2013-07-24 }}

After the US Patent Office considered the evidence asserted at the 2012 trial, including Viola, it granted Eolas a new patent in November 2015 with claims which generally cover cloud computing on the Web. Eolas then filed a new lawsuit against Google, Amazon and Walmart. A 2022 Federal court ruling invalidated the cloud computing patent, saying the patent covered only abstract ideas. Eolas appealed the ruling, but the lower court's ruling was upheld. In October 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear a further challenge by Eolas to the lower court ruling.{{Cite news |last=Brittain |first=Blake |date=2024-10-07 |title=US Supreme Court rejects Eolas patent case against Amazon, Google |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-supreme-court-rejects-eolas-patent-case-against-amazon-google-2024-10-07/ |access-date=2025-03-11 |work=Reuters}}

In February 2006, Microsoft modified its Internet Explorer web browser to attempt to side-step the Eolas patent. The change, first discussed in 2003,{{cite news

| title = Will Microsoft tweak IE?

| first = Matt

| last = Hines

| url = http://news.cnet.com/Will-Microsoft-tweak-IE/2100-1012_3-5069943.html?tag=st.bp.story

| publisher = CBS Interactive

| date = 2003-08-29

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}

requires users to click once on an ActiveX control to "activate" it before they could use its interface. The specific message is "Click to activate this control", shown as a tooltip when the cursor is held over the embedded object. However, following a November 2007 announcement that Microsoft had "licensed the technologies from Eolas",{{cite web

| title = IE Automatic Component Activation (Changes to IE ActiveX Update)

| first = Pete

| last = LePage

| url = http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2007/11/08/ie-automatic-component-activation-changes-to-ie-activex-update.aspx

| publisher = Microsoft

| date = 2007-11-08

| access-date = 2009-10-08

}}

in April 2008, Microsoft released an update which removed the click-to-activate functionality, reverting the software to its original design.{{cite web

| title = The Microsoft Internet Explorer Weblog

| publisher = Microsoft Corporation

| date = 2008-04-08

| url = http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/04/08/ie-automatic-component-activation-now-available.aspx

| access-date = 2008-04-11

}}

In June 2006, Opera Software released version 9 of its Opera browser for Windows and other operating systems, with modifications similar to Microsoft's.

Doyle has stated that Eolas will offer royalty-free licenses to non-commercial entities.{{Citation needed|date=September 2011}} A statement on Eolas' web site clarifies the company's policy with regard to such licenses.{{cite news

|title = Licensing

|url = http://www.eolas.com/licensing.html

|publisher = Eolas

|access-date = 2009-10-08

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100212222034/http://www.eolas.com/licensing.html

|archive-date = 2010-02-12

|url-status = dead

}} {{As of|2020}}, Mozilla Foundation, which develops the open-source Mozilla Firefox browser, has not announced that it has requested any license to the Eolas patents; the last of these patents expired prior to the end of 2017.

Before some claims in the company's patents were invalidated in 2012, one proposed workaround was to dynamically create the HTML element containing the plug-in using JavaScript, rather than embedding it on the page.{{citation needed|date=February 2012}} In this situation, Internet Explorer did not ask the user for an "activation" click because of the infringers' argument that the patent did not cover embedded scripting.

Opera users could use User JavaScript functionality in the browser to attempt to work around this issue in a similar way with locally modified JavaScript.{{cite web|url=http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=349931&t=1283363093&page=1#comment4140641 |title=No Click to Activate - User JavaScript |publisher=opera.com |date=2009-01-28 |access-date=February 11, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110613214924/http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=349931&t=1283363093&page=1#comment4140641|archive-date=June 13, 2011}}

• Software patent
• List of software patents
• Microsoft litigation
• Inventor

{{Reflist|30em}}

• {{Official website|http://www.eolas.com/}}
• [http://www.w3.org/2003/10/27-rogan.html Letter of Sir Tim Berners-Lee to Under Secretary of Commerce]
• [http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2004/06/butting_heads_over_the_906_reb.html Butting Heads Over the '906 Rebuttal, Dale Dougherty]
• [http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/30/020229&tid=155&tid=103 Eolas patent Valid] Slashdot discussion.

{{Authority control}}

Category:Internet technology companies of the United States

Category:Computer law

Category:Patent monetization companies of the United States

Category:United States patent case law

Category:Companies based in Tyler, Texas

Category:American companies established in 1994