Frank M Weyer v. Myspace Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Frank M. Weyer and Troy K. Javaher (Individuals)
  • Defendant: MySpace, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Techcoastlaw
• Case Identification: 2:10-cv-00499, C.D. Cal., 01/25/2010
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper because Defendant MySpace, Inc. resides in the Central District of California.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s social networking website, MySpace.com, infringes a patent related to providing a system of online presences and communication tools for members of a group.
• Technical Context: The lawsuit concerns foundational social networking technologies, specifically the automated creation of user profiles and the provision of distinct communication channels (e.g., public comments and private messages) on a centralized platform.
• Key Procedural History: The patent-in-suit issued on January 5, 2010, and the complaint was filed just 20 days later. The patent claims priority back to a 1999 application, potentially predating the widespread adoption of the accused social networking features.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
1999-11-23	’122 Patent Priority Date
2010-01-05	U.S. Patent No. 7,644,122 Issued
2010-01-25	Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,644,122, Method Apparatus and Business System for Online Communications with Online and Offline Recipients, issued January 5, 2010 (’122 Patent).

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes the uncertainty and difficulty for an internet user wishing to communicate with a specific professional or business (e.g., a doctor) without knowing whether that entity has an internet presence (like a website or email) or what its specific address is (’122 Patent, col. 1:26-48).
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system that automatically creates an online presence (an "individual home page") for every member of a pre-defined group (e.g., all doctors in the U.S.). This system allows a user to find and communicate with any member through a centralized interface, regardless of whether the member previously had an online presence. For members without an existing presence, the system can convert online messages into offline communications like faxes or voice messages (’122 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-11, 28-39).
• Technical Importance: The technology aimed to create a comprehensive and reliable communication directory for specific communities by standardizing access and bridging the gap between online users and offline professionals (’122 Patent, col. 1:49-54).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint does not specify which claims are asserted, but alleges infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶10). Independent claim 1 is representative of the invention.
• Independent Claim 1 requires:
  • A method for providing individual online presences for each of a plurality of members of a group.
  • Maintaining a database of information associated with each member.
  • Allotting an individual URL to each member.
  • Associating an individual home page with each URL, where the home page comprises:
    • Information from the database about the member.
    • A first control for submitting a comment about the member.
    • A second control, separate from the first, for sending a message other than the comment.
  • Receiving an online request for the URL and providing the home page in response.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentality is Defendant's website at www.myspace.com (Compl. ¶10).

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint alleges that MySpace.com provides "online presences for members of a group of members by providing home pages for members that contain controls for sending messages to and for submitting comments about the members" (Compl. ¶8). This corresponds to the core functionality of the MySpace social network, which provided registered users with individual profile pages ("home pages"). These pages allowed other users to post public comments (analogous to "submitting comments") and send private messages to the profile owner (analogous to "sending messages").

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for a claim-chart analysis. The infringement allegations are presented in broad, conclusory terms. The central theory is that the MySpace.com website, by providing user profiles with separate functions for public comments and private messaging, embodies the system claimed in the ’122 Patent (Compl. ¶8, ¶10).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

Identified Points of Contention

• Scope Questions: A primary issue may be the definition of "a group of members." The patent specification repeatedly uses the example of a defined professional cohort, such as "doctors admitted to practice medicine in the United States" (’122 Patent, col. 3:21-24). The litigation will raise the question of whether a self-selecting, general user base of a social network constitutes a "group of members" as contemplated by the patent.
• Technical Questions: The complaint does not explain how MySpace's features map to the specific claim elements. A key question will be whether the platform's features for posting on a user's "wall" and its private messaging system function as the distinct "first control for submitting a comment" and "second control for sending a message" as required by claim 1.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "a plurality of members of a group of members" (from claim 1)

• Context and Importance: The construction of this term appears central to the applicability of the patent to a general-purpose social network like MySpace. A narrow construction could limit the patent to pre-defined professional or business directories, whereas a broader construction could potentially cover social network user bases.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent mentions applicability to a "particular business, professional or other group," which suggests the term is not strictly limited to professional organizations (’122 Patent, col. 1:50-51).
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification's consistent and primary example is "all doctors admitted to the practice of medicine in the United States," which supports a narrower reading limited to a formally defined and enumerated group, rather than an open-ended collection of users (’122 Patent, col. 3:21-24).

• The Term: "a first control for submitting a comment about said individual member; and a second control separate from said first control for sending a message other than said comment" (from claim 1)

• Context and Importance: Practitioners may focus on this term because the infringement case depends on mapping two distinct features of the accused MySpace platform to these two specific, separately claimed controls. The distinction between a "comment" and a "message" will be critical.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not explicitly define "comment" or "message," which may allow for a functional interpretation where any public posting is a "comment" and any private communication is a "message." Claim 12 further specifies sending the "message to an existing e-mail address," suggesting "message" refers to a point-to-point communication distinct from a public posting (’122 Patent, col. 14:50-55).
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The language requires two separate controls, implying distinct user interface elements and underlying functions. A defense could argue that if the features on the accused platform are not sufficiently distinct in function or presentation, they do not meet this limitation. The patent's home page figure (Fig. 9) shows separate buttons for "Post Comment" (925) and "Send E-mail" (920), reinforcing the concept of separate, explicit controls.

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

The complaint makes a conclusory allegation of contributory and induced infringement but does not plead any specific facts to support the required elements of knowledge or intent, such as referencing user manuals or specific instructions provided by Defendant to its users (Compl. ¶10).

Willful Infringement

The complaint alleges that Defendant had "actual notice" and acted in "conscious and willful disregard" of Plaintiffs' rights (Compl. ¶11). However, it does not provide a factual basis for this knowledge, such as the sending of a notice letter prior to the lawsuit. Given that the complaint was filed only 20 days after the patent issued, any allegation of pre-suit willfulness would likely require specific evidence of pre-issuance knowledge.

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

This case, filed in the early era of social media litigation, presents foundational questions of patent scope and applicability. The outcome may depend on the following:

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "group of members," which the patent illustrates with the example of a professional directory, be construed to cover the broad, self-enrolled user base of a general-purpose social network?
• A key evidentiary question will be one of technical mapping: can Plaintiffs demonstrate that the MySpace platform's architecture and user interface, particularly its public "comment" and private "message" features, correspond to the specific and separate control elements recited in the patent's claims? The complaint's lack of factual detail suggests this will be a central point of discovery and dispute.