DORIAN: Your Honor, my clients claim that the Ubersoft Marketing Language uses the same process for separating content from reality that is covered under our patent. As they do not currently have a licensing agreement with us to use our patent in their technology, they are violating patent law.
VIKTOR SCHRECK: Your Honor, the difference between the output of the process covered under their patent and the output of the UML clearly shows they are not the same process. The UML creates output that is directly useful to Ubersoft’s business processes.
DORIAN: Your Honor, refining a process to produce better results is not the same thing as creating an entirely different process. While we acknowledge the UML is more generally useful to Ubersoft’s needs, it is still base don a process my clients patented, and as such my clients are entitled to relief.
VIKTOR SCHRECK: Your Honor, certain vague similarities between the two processes are not enough to prove patent infringement.
DORIAN: That hasn’t been Ubersoft’s position in cases where it has brought suit against companies it claims were violating its own patented processes.
JUDGE: Is that true, councilor?
VIKTOR SCHRECK: At this point I would like to ask the court for a brief recess.