CopyTele Sued Microsoft Over Skype Patent Infringement, Cases to be Brought up Against Many More Web Conferencing Services

CopyTele, a “patent enforcement entity” based in New York, has filed a patent infringement suit against Microsoft in connection with its Skype IP calling and messaging service, now used by 280 million people every month. The two patents in question come from Secure Web Conference Corporation, a subsidiary of publicly-traded CopyTele. They are 6,856,686 B2 (’686 Patent), and 6,856,687 B2 (’687 Patent), respectively covering “method and apparatus for securing e-mail attachments” and “portable telecommunication security device.” “The Patents-in-Suit, generally speaking, relate to secure web-based peer-to-peer communications,” CopyTele writes in its complaint.

If things go CopyTele’s way, this is just the beginning: Robert Berman, the CEO of CopyTele, tells TechCrunch that there are between 90 and 100 web conferencing companies that CopyTele believes are also violating the same patents. “This is a $4 billion industry,” he said. “This is the initiation of what will be a broader patent enforcement campaign.”

CopyTele will have to get in line for its Skype suit: as of last month, the Microsoft subsidiary is also being sued by VirnetX over patent infringement claims (for the second time; they’d already settled past claims). A case brought by a company called Via Vadis, both in Europe and the U.S. back in 2011, around the time that the deal between Microsoft and Skype was first announced, was thrown out in a German court in January.

Nor are these the first patent infringement suits that CopyTele has brought against the tech community. In January, it filed suits against E Ink and AU Optronics Corp, related to technology used in products like Amazon’s Kindle and the Nook from Barnes & Noble, among others.

CopyTele is also amassing other patent portfolios and plans suits against other entities. These include companies that offer loyalty programs. It’s also bought a Windows patent portfolio (for actual windows — not Microsoft Windows).

Companies like Google, BlackBerry and Earthlink have lobbied against patent trolls and what it calls “patent privateering,” when patent enforcement entities make deals with larger companies to take over their portfolios and bring cases against competitors. But Berman paints himself as something of a patent enforcement crusader and takes issue with the categorically negative picture painted around patent trolls.

“I think every patent case needs to be judged on their own merits,” he said. “Just as there are good and bad personal injury lawyers, there are good and bad patent assertion companies. I don’t think it’s fair to assess every company that doesn’t make products as a villain. We are not in the nuisance lawsuit business, particularly when large companies make money out of licensing. What gives large companies the right to do this and not small companies?”

As of today, Senator Charles Schumer is also wading into these waters with proposed legislation that will change how these kinds of cases are brought to court. He’s suggesting that each suit should be reviewed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office before it can proceed through the court system, so that it can vet the cases and decide whether they have any merit on patent grounds. In Schumer’s estimation this should ferret out illegitimate claims while letting genuine patent violations proceed along the costly route to court appearance, or settlement. In theory, if this legislation passes, if CopyTele (or any other company) believes that it has a legit case, it should have nothing to worry about.

We are reaching out to Microsoft for comment on this and will update as we learn more. Update: Microsoft has responded with a “no comment.”

Full complaint below.

Secure Web Confernce Corp. v. Microsoft Corp Complaint

[Source]

You can follow me on Twitter, add me to your circles on Google+ or Subscribe to me on facebook or YouTube. You can also check my website and blog to keep yourself updated with what is happening in the ever changing world of technology

Nokia Acquires Injunction on HTC in Germany Over Battery Wireless Tech

Last May Nokia announced a serious patent offensive against several companies, one of which is HTC. According to FOSS Patents, today a German court awarded Nokia a patent injunction based on power saving technology it has patents for, and it claims is infringed upon by Qualcomm chips used in HTC's phones. While some of its other cases in Germany were stayed or dismissed, this ruling could be used by Nokia against HTC even during a potential appeal. We'll see if this is resolved in the courtroom or by some sort of license agreement, in the meantime we've contacted both companies for more information on the latest round of patent lawsuit bingo.

Update: Nokia has responded, mentioning that it has 30 other patents asserted against HTC in the US, UK and Germany, with a US case scheduled to start in two months. You can read its response in full after the break.

Update 2: HTC tells us that its German business will not be affected by the ruling, and that its newer handsets do not use the technology in question. You can also read their statement in full after the break.

Nokia:

Nokia is pleased with this decision, which confirms the quality of Nokia's patent portfolio. Nokia has also patented this power saving invention in the US, UK, France, Italy, Sweden, Austria, Japan and Hong Kong. In addition to this case in Germany, we have asserted the patent against HTC in the UK and in the US International Trade Commission, with a hearing in the US scheduled to start in two months' time. More than 30 further Nokia patents have been asserted against HTC in other actions brought by Nokia in Germany, the US and the UK. HTC must now respect our intellectual property and compete using its own innovations.

HTC:

Today, the District Court of Mannheim handed down a judgment that HTC had infringed the German part of patent EP 0673175 (the '175 patent) entitled "Reduction of Power Consumption in a Mobile Station". HTC is naturally disappointed with the decision of the court, as it believes that Nokia failed to prove its case adequately. However, as the judgment only covers three handsets that HTC no longer imports into Germany (the Wildfire S, Desire S and Rhyme), this judgment is of little significance. HTC's German business will not be affected by it.

The power-saving technology described in this patent is trivial and contributes only a negligible reduction in power-consumption, so HTC has removed any allegedly corresponding functionality from all of its current German handsets as a precaution against any attempt by Nokia to extend the scope of the judgment unfairly. HTC will be appealing the present decision but also believes that this patent is invalid and so will be continuing with the invalidity actions pending before the German Federal Patents Court and the English Patents Court.

To date, of the twenty-two infringement actions that Nokia has brought against HTC in Germany, two (EP 1329982 and EP 1474750) have been stayed because of concerns over validity and two (EP 0812120 and EP 1312974) have been dismissed outright. This decision cannot be described as a 'win' for Nokia because it only applies to handsets that are no longer imported into Germany, and newer HTC handsets do not use the accused technology. As Nokia clearly went to great lengths to assert its strongest patents first, we are confident that its non-essential patent portfolio poses little threat to HTC. [Source]

You can follow me on Twitter, add me to your circles on Google+ or Subscribe to me on facebook or YouTube. You can also check my website and blog to keep yourself updated with what is happening in the ever changing world of technology

Nokia Files a Document to Support Apple's Request to Block Sale of Samsung Products

As noted by Reuters, Nokia this week filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in support of Apple's bid to block the sale of certain Samsung products previously ruled to have infringed on Apple's patents.

The brief, which is currently sealed but explained in a summary (via AppleInsider) by Nokia attorney Keith Broyles, argues that Judge Lucy Koh was wrong when she ruled that Apple must establish a "causal nexus" between the patented feature and demand for a product before a permanent injunction request is granted.

The filing comes several months after Judge Koh had denied Apple's injunction request.

Nokia's brief wasn't filed specifically to support Apple, but because Nokia feels that Judge Koh's ruling "could cause wide-ranging damage to the United States patent protection landscape." Broyles goes on to argue that Nokia is advocating for patent rights to foster innovation.

"Nokia has recently been involved in numerous U.S. patent lawsuits, as both a plaintiff and defendant. Nokia is thus both a significant patent owner that might seek an injunction to protect its patent rights, and a manufacturer in an industry in which patent owners routinely issue threats of injunctions for patent infringement."

Back in 2009, Apple and Nokia were embroiled in a patent dispute but that ended in 2011 when the two settled and entered into a patent license agreement.

Nokia is the only company to file in support of Apple, and will have an opportunity for companies and advocacy groups to support its position when it files its own brief later this year.[MacRumors]

You can follow me on Twitter, add me to your circles on Google+ or Subscribe to me on facebook or YouTube. You can also check my website and blog to keep yourself updated with what is happening in the ever changing world of technology