Acacia's Streaming Patent Suits Against Dish Are Invalidated

**Scott Greczkowski** · #1 (**permalink**) 10-01-2009, 11:50 AM

Acacia's Streaming Patent Suits Are Invalidated

Last Friday, a federal judge invalidated ten claims relating to Acacia Media Technologies (ACTG) family of patents on audio and video transmission and streaming media. The case dates all the way back to 2002 when Acacia filed suit against Echostar (SATS), DirecTV (DTV), Time Warner Cable (TWC) and CSC Holdings, Inc. (CSC).

Read the rest at Finally, Acacia's Streaming Patent Suits Are Invalidated -- Seeking Alpha

TheKrell · #2 (**permalink**) 10-01-2009, 12:10 PM

So it's not just the PTO that can invalidate dumb-$$$ patents!

navychop · #3 (**permalink**) 10-01-2009, 12:33 PM

I'm surprised it took so long. Hopefully they will be looked at for this action as extortion.

navychop · #4 (**permalink**) 10-01-2009, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKrell

So it's not just the PTO that can invalidate dumb-$$$ patents!

Federal judges seem more or less omnipotent.

The psychiatrist was greeted at the heavenly gates by an agitated St Peter, who told him "We need your help - it's God! He's having delusions of grandeur!" To which the doctor replied: "How can that be? After all, he can think he's God- he IS God!" And St Peter replied "Oh no, it's not that - he thinks he's a federal judge!"

jacmyoung · #5 (**permalink**) 10-01-2009, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKrell

So it's not just the PTO that can invalidate dumb-$$$ patents!

A jury can invalidate a patent too, but for a judge or a jury to invalidate a patent, the moving party (usually the defendants accused of infringement) must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the patent is invalid.

In a PTO reexamination, the requester/PTO only need substantial evidence to invalidate a patent, the standard of proof is much lower with the PTO.

In this case it appears those patents in question were really "dumb-$$$ patents".

DishSubLA · #6 (**permalink**) 10-03-2009, 02:12 AM

This is just one of many such lawsuits that have been filed against some or all of such companies, including the infamous TiVo patent against Echostar/Dish. Gemstar/TV Guide was another that ended pretty well, a settlement, for Dish and TV Guide after a judge threw out the results of the original trail, in which Echostar prevailed.

It's not Dish, and it's not Charlie. It is the greedy little monsters who can't make a go of their business--TiVo was and is still bleeding sub and losing $$$ as their current business model is a failure--and seek to file a patent infringement suit in the hopes of having enough leverage to get a fat settlement. Cable, Dish, Direct, et al. have many more suits just like these still on-going and still being filed. It's a sad scam. One can't blame Charlie for fighting as he has prevailed in the past, and it certainly seems that TiVo's patent in nearly just as too broad as this one's.

mike123abc · #7 (**permalink**) 10-03-2009, 11:37 AM

The patent system has just gotten out of control. Everyone is doing defensive patents as fast as possible. This in turn overwelms that patent office which makes them grant patents that probably should not be granted. Everyone wants to be a position to have patents to bargain with when people sue them. The problem with the system now is that one cannot really tell which patents should be valid any more since no one has time to study them all. A single device could have hundreds of patents applied to it.

One has to hope the court system gets more agressive and starts to throw out patents right and left, sending the signal that your patent better really be new, novel and do something. Not just trying to landmine the path of progress with vague ideas that you never implement. Too bad the court did not make Acacia pay back all the licensing fees and legal bills, that would really send a message.

jacmyoung · #8 (**permalink**) 10-03-2009, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike123abc

...Not just trying to landmine the path of progress with vague ideas that you never implement.

This was not what happened with the TiVo patent. TiVo not only had the patent, they also were one of the two pioneers (with ReplayTV) that implemented and established the DVR market. Which was why when E* was found to have infringed and ordered to disable, that was a fair deal.

But even in such solid cases, the eventual outcomes are never certain. Now, not only has E* designed around the patent, but managed to prove that even the TiVo patent might not be the first of its kind that deserved a patent, at least with respect to the two software claims.

Quote:

Too bad the court did not make Acacia pay back all the licensing fees and legal bills, that would really send a message.

Part of the cost of doing business. If the court orders patent trolls like Acacia to pay up every time they lose, no legit inventors will be able to sue anyone because they are often small guys, without resources to sue large companies. Then all the large companies will be free to copy any inventions without compensating the inventors. The end result will be no small inventors will be motivated to invent, the society as a whole will suffer.

To that end, even asking the PTO to do a more thorough job in weeding out bad patent applications is too much a burden on the PTO and the small inventors. It will cost too much for anyone to get a patent, most small inventors will just give up and stop inventing/seeking patents. Without patent publications, no one can learn from any new inventions disclosed by those patents.

It is a balancing act.