Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Legacy Archives

Eolas Launches Legal Salvo Over Embedded Web Apps

Add as a preferred source on Google

Not many everyday computer users have heard of Eolas, but they’ve almost certainly used thing Eolas claims are its patented technology: the company has filed a federal copyright infringement lawsuit against 22 companies claiming their technology infringes on two Eolas patents covering embedded applications in browsers. Among the named defendants are industry heavyweights like Google, Apple, Adobe, Sun Microsystems, Amazon, eBay, and GoDaddy, along with businesses like BlockBuster and Staples and even JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Eolas Logo
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Eolas claims the companies are violating patent 5,838,906 granted to the company in 1998 concerning a “distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking an external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document.” Eolas also alleges the companies are violating patent 7,599,985, which extends the technology to Web browser plug-ins and Ajax Web application techniques. Among the technologies Eolas claims infringe on its technology are Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Sun’s Java and JavaFX, and Google Chrome.

Recommended Videos

Normally the industry might roll its eyes at such a broad fusillade of patent violation claims, but Eolas has been on this train for years: it won a suit against Microsoft in 2004 over the same patents for some $585 million, and while that judgement was partially overturned the company settled with Microsoft in 2007 an undisclosed amount. Furthermore, Eolas’s ‘906 patent has been upheld as valid twice by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

“We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources,” said Eolas chairman Dr. Michael D. Doyle, in a statement. “Profiting from someone else’s innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair. All we want is what’s fair.”

Obviously, the 22 companies names in the new suit are far from the only companies using these sorts of technologies: if Eolas takes the case through court and wins, tens of thousands of online businesses and Web-based companies would potentially be vulnerable to claims.

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
OpenAI is investigating more incidents of AI agents going rogue days after hack
OpenAI logo on Microsoft surface

It appears that the "AI agents going rogue" tale has more to it than what AI giants have revealed publicly so far. Merely days after OpenAI announced that its AI agents went rogue and hacked Hugging Face, Anthropic dropped a similar bombshell. Soon, it was discovered that not just one, but multiple services were compromised. Well, it seems there are even more layers to it.

Reuters reports that OpenAI has found more incidents of AI agents escaping their software containment environment during research. Citing sources with knowledge of the incident, the outlet notes that the AI agents didn't go beyond OpenAI's software environment and affect any external service.

Read more
AI is finding Apple security flaws faster than Apple can sort through them
Apple has limited how many bug reports researchers can keep open as AI tools produce both genuine Mac vulnerabilities and a flood of questionable submissions
Lighting, Architecture, Building

Apple has capped the number of security reports researchers can keep open at once after AI bug hunting put its review process under pressure, according to the Financial Times.

Some submissions describe hallucinated or purely theoretical risks. Others uncover vulnerabilities serious enough to require patches. Bynario told the FT that it found more than 50 possible macOS flaws in three weeks, including a privilege-escalation chain that could give an attacker full control of a Mac.

Read more
Anthropic is paying $1.5 billion over pirated books, but it can still legally cut up purchased ones
The settlement addressed unauthorized ebook downloads, not the destructive scanning of lawfully bought physical copies, a distinction now alarming booksellers
Book, Publication, Indoors

A federal judge has approved Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over nearly half a million pirated books. The same litigation also protected a more physical method of feeding its AI systems. Anthropic bought print books, removed their bindings, scanned every page and destroyed the originals.

The legal divide came down to acquisition. The settlement covers books downloaded from LibGen and PiLiMi, while the court treated Anthropic’s one-for-one conversion of purchased books into private digital files as fair use. Training AI models on lawfully acquired material was also considered transformative.

Read more