DCT

8:19-cv-02140

Helios Streaming LLC v. Starz Entertainment LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 8:19-cv-02140, C.D. Cal., 11/06/2019
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendants' substantial business in California and the presence of a regular and established place of business within the Central District of California.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendants’ video-on-demand streaming services infringe ten U.S. patents related to the standardized methods for Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH).
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue, MPEG-DASH, is an international standard for enabling high-quality, adaptive bitrate streaming of media over the internet using conventional web servers.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint states that the asserted patents claim inventions incorporated into the MPEG-DASH standard and were largely developed by researchers at the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) in Korea. Plaintiffs acquired the asserted patents or exclusive licenses to them between June and August of 2018. The complaint also asserts that many of the claims are subject to Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing obligations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-09-01 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,356,145
2011-03-16 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,270,830
2011-03-16 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,313,414
2011-07-19 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,362,130
2011-07-20 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 9,325,558
2011-09-06 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,277,660
2011-09-06 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,645,562
2011-09-06 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,909,805
2011-09-06 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 9,467,493
2013-07-24 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 10,375,373
2014-02-04 U.S. Patent No. 8,645,562 Issued
2014-12-09 U.S. Patent No. 8,909,805 Issued
2016-04-26 U.S. Patent No. 9,325,558 Issued
2016-10-11 U.S. Patent No. 9,467,493 Issued
2018-06-01 Approximate Start of Patent Acquisition by Ideahub
2018-08-01 Approximate End of Patent Acquisition/Licensing by Plaintiffs
2018-08-23 Alleged Date of Actual Notice for ’562, ’805, ’558, and ’493 Patents
2019-04-23 U.S. Patent No. 10,270,830 Issued
2019-04-30 U.S. Patent No. 10,277,660 Issued
2019-06-04 U.S. Patent No. 10,313,414 Issued
2019-07-16 U.S. Patent No. 10,356,145 Issued
2019-07-23 U.S. Patent No. 10,362,130 Issued; Alleged Date of Actual Notice
2019-08-06 U.S. Patent No. 10,375,373 Issued; Alleged Date of Actual Notice
2019-11-06 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 10,270,830 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content Using Representations"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,270,830, titled "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content Using Representations," issued on April 23, 2019 (Compl. ¶31).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent background describes adaptive streaming services where a client requests media sequences suitable for its environment from a server offering various qualities (Compl. ¶26; ’830 Patent, col. 1:32-44). The implicit technical challenge is structuring the metadata that describes these options in an efficient and parsable manner.
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a hierarchical data model, the Media Presentation Description (MPD), for organizing media content. This model structures content into a hierarchy of Periods, Adaptation Sets, Representations, and Segments (’830 Patent, FIG. 1). A core inventive concept is the use of common attributes defined at a higher level (e.g., the Period level) that are inherited by and apply to all elements at lower levels (e.g., all Representations within that Period), which simplifies the MPD file and reduces redundancy (’830 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:9-16).
  • Technical Importance: This hierarchical model with inheritable attributes provided a foundational structure for the MPEG-DASH standard, enabling efficient delivery of adaptive streaming from standard HTTP servers (Compl. ¶23-27).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1 (client-side method), 8 (server-side method), 15 (client-side method with a "SegmentBase" element), and 19 (client-side method with a "SegmentTemplate" element), along with multiple dependent claims (Compl. ¶34, ¶81, ¶91).
  • Essential Elements of Independent Claim 8 (Server Method):
    • Transmitting a Media Presentation Description (MPD) to a client.
    • Receiving a request for a segment of media content from the client.
    • Transmitting the requested media content to the client.
    • The MPD has a hierarchical structure of periods, adaptation sets, representations, and segments.
    • The MPD includes attributes/elements that are common to all hierarchical levels below where they are defined (e.g., an attribute at the MPD level is common to all periods, adaptation sets, representations, and segments).

U.S. Patent No. 10,277,660 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,277,660, titled "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content," issued on April 30, 2019 (Compl. ¶108).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: In an adaptive streaming system, a client must construct a full Uniform Resource Locator (URL) to request a specific media segment. This process can be complicated if the metadata file (MPD) omits certain expected information, such as a specific "sourceURL" attribute for a given media segment (’660 Patent, col. 10:4-14).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for URL generation in cases where metadata is incomplete. Specifically, if the metadata for a requested segment does not contain a "sourceURL" attribute, a "BaseURL" element defined elsewhere in the metadata is used to "replace" the missing attribute, allowing for the successful generation of a complete URL to retrieve the media segment (’660 Patent, Abstract; col. 31:59-63).
  • Technical Importance: This method creates a robust fallback mechanism for URL construction, allowing for more flexible and less redundant metadata file structures in adaptive streaming systems.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 20 (server-side method) and dependent claim 21 (Compl. ¶111, ¶113, ¶117).
  • Essential Elements of Independent Claim 20 (Server Method):
    • Receiving a URL request for a media segment from a client, where the request is based on metadata that includes a "BaseURL" element.
    • Sending the requested segment to the client.
    • The method includes the step where, when the metadata lacks a "sourceURL" attribute for the segment, the "BaseURL" element is used to replace the "sourceURL" attribute to generate the URL.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,313,414

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,313,414, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content Using Representations," issued June 4, 2019 (Compl. ¶126).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent is similar to the ’830 Patent, focusing on the hierarchical MPD structure. It claims methods where attributes common to all representations within a single adaptation set (e.g., "mimeType" or "framerate") are defined at the adaptation set level (’414 Patent, Abstract; col. 30:7-9).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 (client method), 8 (client method, induced), 11 (server method), 21 (server method), 25 (server method), and 28 (server method, induced) are asserted (Compl. ¶129).
  • Accused Features: The accused features are the use of attributes like "mimeType" and "framerate" at the adaptation set level in the Starz MPD files, which are alleged to be common to all representations within that set (Compl. ¶138).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,356,145

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,356,145, "Method and Device for Providing Streaming Content," issued July 16, 2019 (Compl. ¶183).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes methods for providing media content where the MPD organizes representations into "groups." A key feature is a "group element" that provides a summary of attribute values (e.g., "mimeType", "minBandWidth", "maxBandwidth") for all representations within that group, simplifying client-side selection (’145 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 (server method), 3 (client method, induced), 5 (client method, induced), 11 (server method), and 17 (client method, induced) are asserted (Compl. ¶186).
  • Accused Features: The accused functionality involves the Starz streaming service using group elements in its MPD that provide a summary of values, such as a common "mimeType" of "video/mp4," for all video representations within a video adaptation set (Compl. ¶193-194).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,362,130

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,362,130, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Contents," issued July 23, 2019 (Compl. ¶266).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims methods for providing streaming content where a representation includes a "bandwidth" attribute related to a hypothetical constant bitrate channel. This attribute assures a client that it will have enough data for continuous playout after buffering for a specified "minbuffertime" (’130 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 (server method) and 4 (server apparatus) are asserted (Compl. ¶269).
  • Accused Features: The Starz service is accused of providing MPDs where video representations include a "bandwidth" attribute (e.g., 2400K) that ensures continuous playback after an initial buffering period (Compl. ¶277).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,375,373

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,375,373, "Method and Apparatus for Encoding Three-Dimensional (3D) Content," issued August 6, 2019 (Compl. ¶308).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes methods for adaptive streaming where the MPD provides information enabling a client to switch between different representations to adapt to network conditions. It specifies particular attributes ("bandwidth", "width", "height", "framerate") that can be included at the adaptation set level (’373 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 (server method), 9 (server apparatus), and 17 (client method, induced) are asserted (Compl. ¶311).
  • Accused Features: The accused feature is the Starz MPD providing information, such as multiple representations with different bandwidths (e.g., 3000K and 750K), that allows the client to switch representations to adapt to network conditions (Compl. ¶319).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,645,562

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,645,562, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content," issued February 4, 2014 (Compl. ¶368).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a client-side method for adaptive streaming. The client receives metadata with one or more "BaseURL" elements, sends a request for a media segment using a URL resolved with respect to a "BaseURL" element, and then receives, decodes, and renders the data (’562 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 and 4 (client-side methods, induced) are asserted (Compl. ¶371).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement by end-user clients of the Starz service, which are alleged to receive MPDs with "BaseURL" elements and use them to construct URLs for requesting media segments (Compl. ¶374-375).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,909,805

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,909,805, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content," issued December 9, 2014 (Compl. ¶407).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims methods for providing media where metadata includes one or more "periods," and the start time of a period is determined based on specific rules. For instance, if a "start" attribute exists, that value is used; if not, the start time is calculated from the duration of the previous period (’805 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (method for providing media, induced) is asserted (Compl. ¶410).
  • Accused Features: The accused feature is the Starz MPD for "Toy Story 3," which allegedly includes a "start" attribute ("Period start=‘PT0S’") that determines the start time of a period (Compl. ¶419).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,325,558

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,325,558, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Contents," issued April 26, 2016 (Compl. ¶437).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a client-side method where metadata includes a "minBufferTime" attribute indicating the minimum amount of initially buffered media required to ensure playout. The client receives media, buffers at least that minimum amount, and then begins playback (’558 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (client-side method, induced) is asserted (Compl. ¶440).
  • Accused Features: End-user clients of the Starz service are accused of performing this method by receiving an MPD with a "minBufferTime" attribute, buffering the corresponding amount of media, and then playing the content (Compl. ¶443-445).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,467,493

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,467,493, "Apparatus and Method for Providing Streaming Content," issued October 11, 2016 (Compl. ¶468).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method where metadata "selectively comprises" a "sourceURL" attribute. When the "sourceURL" is present, a "BaseURL" element is "mapped" to it to generate the final URL for a media segment (’493 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 and 4 (methods for providing media, induced) are asserted (Compl. ¶471).
  • Accused Features: The Starz service is accused of providing MPDs that selectively include a "sourceURL" attribute, to which a "BaseURL" element is then mapped to generate the request URL (Compl. ¶477).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are the video-on-demand ("VOD") streaming services provided by Defendants through platforms such as https://www.starz.com/ (Compl. ¶25, ¶34).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that the accused services operate using the MPEG-DASH standard to deliver streaming media content to end-users (Compl. ¶34). When a user selects a video, such as "Black Sails: Ep 410," the user's client device allegedly receives a Media Presentation Description (MPD) file (e.g., "dashWeb.mpd") from a Starz server. This MPD file is alleged to contain the metadata structure and attributes that allow the client to request and receive media segments for playback (Compl. ¶37-38). The complaint does not provide specific details on the market positioning of the services. No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 10,270,830 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 8) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a method of providing media content performed by a server or multiple servers, comprising: transmitting a Media Presentation Description (MPD)...to a client; At least one server operating on behalf of Starz transmits an MPD of the form "dashWeb.mpd" to the client. ¶37 col. 30:8-10
receiving a request, from the client, for a segment of the media content; At least one server operating on behalf of Starz receives a request from the client for a segment of the selected media content. ¶38 col. 30:10-11
transmitting the media content to the client, At least one server operating on behalf of Starz transmits the requested media content to the client. ¶38 col. 30:12
wherein the MPD includes one or more periods, wherein each of the periods includes one or more adaptation sets, wherein each of the adaptation sets includes one or more representations, wherein each of the representations includes one or more segments, The accused MPD allegedly includes at least one period, which in turn includes adaptation sets (e.g., audio and video), which include multiple representations, each of which includes at least one segment. ¶39-41 col. 30:13-16
wherein the MPD includes one or more attributes or elements that are common to each of the periods, each of the adaptation sets, each of the representations, and each of the segments, The accused MPD allegedly includes attributes of "mediaPresentationDuration" and "minBufferTime" that are common to all periods, adaptation sets, representations, and segments within the MPD. ¶42 col. 30:16-20
wherein the period includes one or more attributes or elements that are common to each of the adaptation sets, each of the representations, and each of the segments for that period, The accused MPD's period allegedly includes attributes of a start and duration that are common to each hierarchical level below the period. ¶43 col. 30:20-24
wherein the adaptation set includes one or more attributes or elements that are common to each of the representations and each of the segments for that adaptation set, The accused MPD's video adaptation set allegedly includes attributes, such as a frame rate, that are common to the representations and segments within that adaptation set. ¶44 col. 30:24-27
and wherein the representation includes one or more attributes or elements that are common to each of the segments for that representation. A video representation in the accused MPD allegedly includes common elements such as id, bandwidth, and "BaseURL" that are common to each of the segments for that representation. ¶45 col. 30:28-30
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be the proper construction of "common to." Infringement appears to depend on whether attributes in the accused MPD files are "common" in the specific, hierarchical, and inheritable manner described in the patent, or are merely co-located within the same data structure without the functional relationship required by the claim language.
    • Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that an attribute like "frame rate" is functionally "common to" and inherited by both the representations and segments within an adaptation set, as claim 8 requires? The analysis will likely require examination of the client-side software that parses the MPD to determine if it treats these attributes as hierarchically inherited.

U.S. Patent No. 10,277,660 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 20) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
receiving, from a client, a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) request for a segment of the media content based on a metadata of the media content, wherein the metadata comprises a BaseURL element; At least one server operating on behalf of Starz receives a URL request for segments of "Power Ep 101" based on metadata from the "dashWeb.mpd" file, which comprises a "BaseURL" element. ¶114 col. 31:53-57
and sending the requested segment to the client; The server sends the requested segment to the client. ¶114 col. 31:58
wherein when the metadata does not comprise a sourceURL attribute of the requested segment, the BaseURL element is used to replace the sourceURL attribute, so that the URL is generated. The metadata for a representation in the "dashWeb.mpd" allegedly does not define a "sourceURL" attribute, so the "BaseURL" element is used to replace the missing attribute and generate the final URL. ¶115 col. 31:59-63
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: Does the URL generation process in the accused system constitute "replacing" a "sourceURL" attribute, as required by the claim? A court may need to determine if this requires a specific logical step of substitution, or if any process that uses the "BaseURL" in the absence of a "sourceURL" falls within the claim scope.
    • Technical Questions: What is the precise mechanism by which the Starz client generates segment URLs from the MPD? The infringement allegation hinges on the client-side software performing a specific conditional logic (i.e., checking for a "sourceURL" and, finding it absent, using the "BaseURL"). This raises an evidentiary question about the operational details of the accused client software.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • For the ’830 Patent:

    • The Term: "attributes or elements that are common to"
    • Context and Importance: This phrase is repeated throughout claim 8 to define the hierarchical inheritance structure that is central to the invention. The infringement case rests on whether attributes in the accused MPD file are "common" in the functional, inheritable sense taught by the patent, rather than simply being present at a high level in the data structure.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that adaptation sets, representations, and sub-representations "may share common attributes and elements," which could support a more general meaning of shared characteristics (’830 Patent, col. 7:34-36).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim itself recites a specific cascading hierarchy of commonality, suggesting a functional meaning where an attribute defined at one level is inherited by and applies to all subordinate levels. For example, an attribute "common to each of the periods, each of the adaptation sets..." implies a different and broader scope than one that is merely "common to each of the representations and each of the segments for that adaptation set" (’830 Patent, col. 30:16-30).

  • For the ’660 Patent:

    • The Term: "the BaseURL element is used to replace the sourceURL attribute"
    • Context and Importance: This language defines the specific action that allegedly occurs when a "sourceURL" is missing. The dispute may turn on whether the accused system performs this exact "replacement" operation or generates the URL through a different process, such as simple concatenation of the "BaseURL" with other path information.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract states more generally that URLs of segments "may be generated based on the BaseURL elements," which could suggest that any use of the "BaseURL" to form a final URL in the absence of a "sourceURL" meets the limitation (’660 Patent, Abstract).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim's use of the active verb "replace" suggests a specific logical operation: the system seeks a "sourceURL", finds it absent, and substitutes the "BaseURL" value in its place to generate the URL. This points to a more specific function than merely using the "BaseURL" as a default prefix (’660 Patent, col. 31:59-62).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement for numerous claims across the asserted patents. The allegations are based on Defendants providing the streaming service, including client software and materials, to end-users and partners, who then directly infringe the client-side method claims by using the service as intended (Compl. ¶103-104, ¶178-179).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willfulness for all asserted patents. For several older patents (e.g., ’562, ’805, ’558, ’493), willfulness is based on alleged actual notice and knowledge since "at least approximately August 23, 2018" (Compl. ¶400, ¶430, ¶461, ¶489). For more recently issued patents, willfulness is based on knowledge "since at least the time of receiving this Complaint" (Compl. ¶101, ¶105).

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

  • A central issue will be one of technical implementation versus claim scope: Do the accused Starz streaming services perform the specific, multi-step functions recited in the asserted claims? For example, does the system's metadata structure exhibit the precise hierarchical inheritance of "common" attributes required by the ’830 Patent, and does its URL generation logic perform a specific "replacement" of a missing "sourceURL" attribute as claimed by the ’660 Patent? The resolution will depend on a detailed factual analysis of the accused system's code and operation.
  • A key legal issue will be the impact of the patents' alleged standard-essential status and associated FRAND obligations. The complaint's acknowledgement of FRAND licensing obligations raises critical questions for calculating a potential reasonable royalty and may open the door to equitable defenses concerning the Plaintiffs' licensing conduct (Compl. ¶495).
  • A significant question for damages will be willfulness, especially for the portfolio of older patents where Plaintiffs allege pre-suit knowledge dating back to August 2018. The determination will depend on the factual circumstances surrounding the alleged notice and the objective reasonableness of Defendants' potential non-infringement and invalidity defenses.