Brianna™

VS.

 Microsoft VS. AT&T U.S. Supreme Court justices debated definitions of, software and component in a Microsoft Corp. vs. AT&T Inc. patent case. At issue is whether Microsoft can be held liable for violating an AT&T patent on technology that condenses speech into computer code, similar to that found on Microsoft’s Windows program, The Washington Post reports. Microsoft ships code overseas in master disks that get copied before being installed in a manner the justices agreed would be infringing if it had taken place on U.S. soil. A question they asked is whether software code is a component that can be patented. Justice Anthony Kennedy called it  Microsoft would contend a computer, rather than software, is product. On the flip-side, justices worried a decision in favor or AT&T could be overbroad, turning any transmission of information about a patented process into a potential patent infringement. So Microsoft won. If AT&T would’ve won, then many companies involved in the practice of sending software overseas, would’ve cost the software industry billions of dollars for past infringement. And if AT&T won, then Mircosoft would’ve owed them around 1 billion dollars.