AT&T v. Microsoft

Microsoft shipped a gold master cdrom overseas. This gold master was used to duplicate the Windows operating system in the foreign country and included AT&T's patented speech codec technology. AT&T sued Microsoft under 35 U.S.C. 271 (f). The C.A.F.C. interpretted the statutory language of section 271(f) to include shipping of software gold master cdrom.
However, the dissent argued that there was no further distinction between supplying and copying under section 271(f) for software technology.
Links:

• CAFC's opinion in MP3 format
• CAFC's decision in PDF format.
• Dennis Crouch's article at Patently-O