In an attempt to reduce “friction” in the patent market, Google is inviting patent holders to sell their patents to Google, Google Deputy General Counsel-Patents Allen Lo wrote in a blog post Monday. “The usual patent marketplace can sometimes be challenging, especially for smaller participants who sometimes end up working with patent trolls.” Lawsuits, wasted efforts and bad karma can happen without “any meaningful benefit to the original patent owner,” he said. Google’s Patent Purchase Promotion will be open May 8-22. Patent holders will be able to tell Google about the patents they’re willing to sell at a set price, Lo said. After the portal closes, Google will review the submissions and let patent holders know by June 26 if Google is interested in buying the patent, Lo said. “There’s some fine print that you absolutely want to make sure you fully understand before participating,” Lo said, which is why Google recommended participants speak with an attorney. More information on the experimental Patent Purchase Promotion is on Google’s Patent Website.
Disney signed a multiyear patent license deal with Kudelski Group, a Kudelski news release said Tuesday. It said terms are confidential, and the pact gives Disney a license to Kudelski’s patent portfolio, "subject to certain limitations." Kudelski "continues to invest heavily in developing technology and intellectual property that help enable industry leaders like" Disney "to deliver their popular, world-class video and entertainment platforms to the market through streaming video properties, such as ESPN.com and ABC.com,” said Kudelski Senior Vice President-Intellectual Property and Innovation Joe Chernesky.
The U.S. Copyright Office is seeking comment on copyright protections for visual works, particularly how the Copyright Act treats the registration, monetization and enforcement of copyrights on photos and illustrations. The Copyright Office said in Friday’s Federal Register that it wants to get input on the current state of the market for photos and illustrations and roadblocks to enforcing copyrights on those works. Comments on these copyright issues are likely to lead to more specific comment inquiries, the Copyright Office said. Comments are due July 23 and reply comments are due Aug. 24.
Synaptics filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission requesting a Tariff Act Section 337 investigation on touch screen controllers imported by Blu Products and Goodix. Synaptics said April 21 that Goodix is manufacturing and importing infringing touch-screen controllers, including Goodix’s GT915 controller. The allegedly infringing touch-screen controllers are also being incorporated into Blu Products smartphones, such as the BLU Studio 5.0C HD, alleged Synaptics. It asked the ITC to issue limited exclusion orders and cease and desist orders prohibiting import and sale of infringing merchandise by Blu Products and Goodix. Comments are due to the ITC May 5. Blu had no comment. Goodix said it believes Synaptic's allegations "are without merit, and it will vigorously defend itself against Synaptics’ allegations, while continuing to fully service and support its customers." Goodix "respects intellectual property rights and the rights of inventors to protect their innovations, in the same manner that Goodix expects others to respect its own intellectual property rights," said the company in a Thursday news release.
Defendant iHeartMedia uses Impulse Radio’s data services technology without a license and so has infringed an Impulse patent describing a “system and method for generating multimedia accompaniments to broadcast data,” Impulse alleged in an April 8 complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. The complaint also named iBiquity Digital as a co-defendant, alleging the HD Radio licensor “brazenly represents to broadcasters that it has a license to Impulse’s patented and proprietary technology and the right to sublicense that technology to broadcasters, including iHeartMedia,” as part of its HD Radio “software and services,” when in fact "no such license or right to sublicense exists.” The U.S. patent at issue in the complaint (7,908,172) was granted in March 2011, assigned to Impulse and listed David Corts, Lee Hunter, Paul Signorelli, Terrance Snyder and Bryce Wells as inventors. The data services technology pioneered by Impulse “can take a variety of forms,” including providing album art as well as artist and title information on a radio’s front panel, the complaint said. The technology also enables an “interactive listening experience,” such as the ability to buy music at the “touch of a button” by embedding the radio broadcast with data from a music-selling service, it said. “These innovations enable HD Radio broadcasters to offer a more dynamic and marketable multi-media radio experience.” Impulse and iBiquity share a long cooperative history, even embarking together in September 2002 on an “Extreme Digital Road Show” tour across the U.S. to drum up support for HD Radio, the complaint said. Over the years, the two companies even signed a series of standards agreements, it said. The agreements “explicitly prohibited” iBiquity from using the Impulse technology without Impulse’s “express written consent,” it said. Ibiquity spokesman Joe D'Angelo emailed us Wednesday to decline to comment, citing company policy not to discuss "pending litigation." Representatives of iHeartMedia didn’t respond to queries.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled against former wrestler Steve “Wild Thing” Ray's appeal of his lawsuit against ESPN, saying U.S. District Court Judge Scott Wright was correct in dismissing the lawsuit because the Copyright Act “preempts Ray's claims” that ESPN misappropriated his name, invaded his privacy and interfered with his prospective economic advantage by re-telecasting his Universal Wrestling Federation (UWF) performances. Ray claimed that ESPN re-telecast his wrestling performances without his consent, saying the matches had been “filmed for future use to generate revenue.” Wright ruled in 2014 that the Copyright Act pre-empted Ray's claims because his performances were part of copyrighted material “and his likenesses couldn't be detached from the copyrighted performances that were contained in the films.” ESPN and Ray didn't comment. The appeals court is based in St. Louis.
Most so-called patent trolls “don’t produce anything, they just shake down anyone who does,” comedian John Oliver said in an 11-minute segment Sunday on his HBO show Last Week Tonight that poked satirical fun at the patent abuse problem. “So calling them trolls is a little misleading. At least trolls actually do something. They control bridge access for goats and ask people fun riddles. Patent trolls just threaten to sue the living shit out of people, and believe me, those lawsuits add up.” Patent trolls have manipulated the system down "to such a science," Oliver said. For example, in seeking lucrative patent infringement settlements, patent trolls “work out the maximum amount of money you’d be willing to pay, rather than go to court and negotiate for that,” he said. “They pick a number the same way airlines pick a cabin temperature -- perfectly calibrated to make you miserable, but not so much that you’d actually do anything about it.” Oliver also took aim at the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, which patent reform advocates have criticized as notoriously friendly to frivolous patent lawsuits. “A quarter of all patent cases are filed in Marshall, Texas,” he said. “And believe me, it is not because the people there are inventing like a meth head in a Home Depot aisle.” Saying trial lawyer lobbyists killed the last congressional attempt at patent reform, Oliver said: “You cannot let trial lawyers decide whether there should be more baseless lawsuits. That’s the equivalent of trusting raccoons to make laws about garbage-can placements.”
Sisvel is expanding the scope of its LTE patent pool, offering patent licenses covering all LTE and LTE-Advanced specifications, a news release from Sisvel said Monday. The portfolio includes patents owned by Airbus DS, Bräu, the China Academy of Telecommunication Technology, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, KPN, Orange and TDF, Sisvel said. The patent license covers the most recent LTE and LTE-Advanced specifications without any additional changes to the terms and conditions set for the license previously offered only for the LTE patent portfolio, providing for the same running royalty rate.
Correction: NAB said that as of Wednesday the Local Radio Freedom Act (House Concurrent Resolution-17/Senate Concurrent Resolution-4) had 154 co-sponsors in the House (see 1504160050).
A Dutch-based owner of several streaming media patents slapped nine prominent smartphone and tablet brands with separate, but nearly identical patent infringement complaints Thursday, seeking in all the cases jury trials, compensatory and punitive damages, and permanent injunctions against the infringing products. Apple, Dell, HTC, Huawei, LG, Microsoft, Motorola Mobility, Samsung and ZTE are guilty of infringing U.S. patent 8,090,862, published in January 2012, said the owner, Nonend Inventions, of Bilthoven, the Netherlands, in each of the complaints. It also alleged LG has infringed a second patent, U.S. 7,590,752, published in September 2009. Both patents were assigned to Nonend and list Marc van Oldenborgh and Marijn Gnirrep as inventors. The 2012 patent describes systems and methods “for streaming content over a network that enables communication between a first consumer node, a second consumer node, and a production node.” The 2009 patent describes the “apparatus” for “playing media content on a media player while streaming the retrieved parts of the media content to other devices.” Representatives of the companies named as defendants didn’t comment. All the complaints were filed in U.S. District Court in Marshall, Texas. It’s part of the Eastern District of Texas that CEA President Gary Shapiro recently blasted as a “notoriously” friendly haven for frivolous patent infringement suits (see 1502270013). For LG, it’s the second patent infringement complaint filed against the company within a week in the same courthouse (see 1504060053).