NetApp sued Sun Microsystems claiming that the ZFS technology Sun open sourced in 2005 infringes NetApp patents. Sun contributed ZFS to the community, and that contribution is now under attack from a vendor that wants to keep the IT community locked into its proprietary solutions. Among other things, NetApp is asking a court to order Sun to remove the ZFS code from open source.
Update: July 2009 Sun is pleased to report that we have received Notices of Intent to Issue Certificates of Re-Examination for both Sun patent 6,591,303 and 5,761,662. Even with the additional prior art considered as part of the re-examinations, the PTO decided to reissue both patents with some of the claims as originally presented in these patents. The PTO has also issued a final rejection in the re-examination of NetApps' Patent 5,819,292 in which it rejected all claims asserted by NetApp against Sun. Copies of the PTO documents may be found in the more information tab.
Update: 06/08/09 The Court has issued the Markman orders for the second and third cases. After claim construction, all of Sun's patents asserted against NetApp remain. As the case continues to progress, Sun remains extremely confident in its position, and that these lawsuits will be resolved in our favor. Motions for summary judgment for the first two cases are due in the next month. Additionally, the US Patent Office has found that Sun's 6,591,303 contains allowable
claims despite the vast amount of prior art submitted by NetApp in its Reexamination Request. The PTO has also issued office actions rejecting all claims of NetApp patent 7,313,720 and all claims for which Sun requested reexamination in NetApp patent 7,174,352. Thus, all of the claims in NetApp's five patents subject to reexamination stand rejected. It is interesting to note that in all three of the NetApp reexaminations in which the PTO has issued an action in response to NetApp's filing, the PTO found that NetApp's responses were non-compliant (specifically, did not comply with 37 CFR 1.530). This results in extra time and extra work for the PTO to process these reexaminations. Copies of the Markman orders and PTO Office Actions can be found under the more information tab.
Update: 9/10/08 The Court issues a Markman order.
The Court found each of the asserted claims in NetApp's '715 patent relating to RAID technology to be indefinite, meaning invalid. The court found by clear and convincing evidence that a skill artisan could not discern the boundaries of the claim based on the claim language, the specification, the prosecution history, as well as his/her knowledge of the relevant area. The court agreed with Sun's position that the claims are flatly inconsistent with and impossible under the teaching of the patent specification. Thus, we have no further concerns with this patent and any of its remaining claims. A copy of the full claim construction order can be found under the more information tab.
Update: 8/28/08 US Patent Office has rejected all 24 Claims of NetApp 6,892,211 based on 12 prior art references.
In rejecting all of the claims of the patent, the PTO found that prior art references invalidated the claims as being both anticipated and obvious under 35 USC 102 and 103. In total, the PTO found /sixteen/ bases for rejecting the claims. NetApp had previously asked the court to construe the term "File System" of it this patent in an attempt to keep out of the trial the prior art that the patent office has now reviewed and found bases for rejecting the patent. We have a renewed motion to stay pending before the court with regard to this patent. A copy of the non-final office action can be found under the more information tab.
Update: US Patent Office Grants Sun's Request to Reexamine NetApp
Patent Numbers 5,819,292; 6,857,001 and 6,892,211. In addition, all claims of the '001 patent purportedly relating to writable snapshots have been rejected by the US Patent Office. A copy of the reexam orders can be found under the "More Information" tab.
Update: Sun files another lawsuit against NetApp. On March 28 Sun
filed another lawsuit against NetApp alledging that storage management technology NetApp acquired from Onaro infringes Sun patents. A copy of the complaint can be found under the "More Information" tab.
Background
The purpose of this website is to inform the open source community about the patent lawsuit launched by NetApp, and to invite open source developers to help in responding to these claims.
NetApp has claimed that ZFS infringes 7 of NetApp's WAFL and storage patents. In one example, NetApp claims broadly to have invented the concept of "copy on write." Examples of such claims found in the NetApp patents are highlighted below. For those without prior experience in patent matters, claim language can, at times, be difficult to understand, especially when read out of context. Reading the complete patent can help put the claim language in perspective. Copies of the NetApp patents can be found under the "More Information" tab.
The open source development community is a great source of historical knowledge regarding storage and file system technology. Any information you can provide regarding technology related to these patents, especially similar technology that predates the patents, could be helpful, so please share. As in the spirit of other open source contributions, get involved and help to keep ZFS free!
Examples of particularly spurious patent claims are provided below:
NetApp Patent Number: 5,819,292 - purportedly relating to "copy on write"
4. A method for maintaining a file system comprising blocks of data stored in blocks of a non-volatile storage means at successive consistency points comprising the steps of:
- storing a first file system information structure for a first consistency point in said non-volatile storage means, said first file system information structure comprising data describing a layout of said file system at said first consistency point of said file system; of data of said file system that have been modified
- writing blocks from said first consistency point as of the commencement of a second consistency point to free blocks of said non-volatile storage means;
- storing in said non-volatile storage means a second file system information structure for said second consistency point, said second file system information structure comprising data describing a layout said file system at said second consistency point of said file system.
NetApp Patent Number: 6,857,001 - purportedly relating to "writable snapshots"
1. A method of operating data storage, the method including maintenance of plural active file systems, wherein each of the active file systems initially access data shared with another of the active file systems, and wherein changes made to each of the active file systems are not reflected in the active file system with which the changed active file system shares the data.
|
NetApp Patent Number: 7,174, 352 - purportedly relating to "snapshot"
38. In a file system having a plurality of storage blocks, a data structure including
- a snapshot of a set of member storage blocks selected from said plurality, said member storage blocks forming a consistent file system other than an active file system;
- said snapshot being represented as an object in said file system and having a set of storage blocks for recording said snapshot;
- whereby a backup and restore operation on said file system has the property of preserving said snapshot within said file system.
|
