DCT
3:19-cv-05036
WAG Acquisition LLC v. FriendFinder Networks Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: WAG Acquisition, LLC. (New Jersey)
- Defendant: FriendFinder Networks Inc. (California); Streamray Inc. (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: LEWIS BAACH pllc
- Case Identification: 2:14-cv-03456, D.N.J., 07/29/2014
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b), and further alleges that Defendants derive revenue from performers located within the District of New Jersey who use Defendants' network facilities.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ live webcam streaming services infringe four patents related to streaming media buffering and delivery technology designed to reduce delays and interruptions.
- Technical Context: The technology addresses methods for improving the user experience of internet media streaming by mitigating issues of "buffering" delays and "jitter" that were common in the early 2000s.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint is a First Amended Complaint, superseding an original complaint filed on May 30, 2014. Subsequent to the filing of this complaint, several asserted patents underwent post-grant proceedings. U.S. Patent No. 8,122,141 had claims 10-23 cancelled in an Inter Partes Review (IPR). U.S. Patent No. 8,364,839 also had numerous claims cancelled in IPR proceedings, including claims 1, 5, and 12. These cancellations may significantly narrow the scope of the dispute for those patents.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2000-09-12 | Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit |
| 2012-02-21 | U.S. Patent No. 8,122,141 Issues |
| 2012-05-22 | U.S. Patent No. 8,185,611 Issues |
| 2012-12-04 | U.S. Patent No. 8,327,011 Issues |
| 2013-01-29 | U.S. Patent No. 8,364,839 Issues |
| 2014-05-30 | Original Complaint Filed / Demand Letter Sent (Notice Date) |
| 2014-06-03 | Defendants Served with Process |
| 2014-07-29 | First Amended Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,122,141 - "Streaming Media Buffering System," Issued Feb. 21, 2012
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes the shortcomings of then-current internet streaming, where users experienced long startup delays for "buffering" and frequent interruptions or "dropouts" due to inconsistent network performance, making the experience unlike traditional radio or television (Compl. ¶8; ’141 Patent, col. 6:31-38).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a client-pull system where a server assigns serial identifiers to sequential "data elements" of a media stream. A client-side "media player" then requests these elements by their identifiers, allowing the client to control the flow of data. The system is designed to send data to the user at a rate "more rapid than the rate at which said streaming media is played back," which allows the user's buffer to be filled or refilled quickly to protect against network interruptions (’141 Patent, col. 13:21-34, Abstract).
- Technical Importance: This client-centric approach was designed to make internet streaming more resilient to the variable conditions of the public internet, a key step in enabling reliable live-streaming services (Compl. ¶8).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 10, 19, 24, and 28, along with various dependent claims (Compl. ¶¶42-45, 48). Subsequent to this filing, claims 10-23 were cancelled by an IPR. The surviving asserted independent claims from the complaint are 1 and 24.
- Independent Claim 1 (Method for distributing streaming media):
- Providing a server programmed to receive requests for media data elements having specified serial identifiers.
- The server sends the requested media data elements at a rate more rapid than the user's playback rate.
- Providing player software to the user that is programmed to maintain a record of the last data element received and to transmit requests for subsequent data elements.
- Independent Claim 24 (Player Software):
- A routine that maintains a record of the identifier of the last sequential media data element received by the player.
- A routine that requests transmission of the next sequential media data elements.
- The complaint also reserves the right to assert other claims (Compl. ¶42).
U.S. Patent No. 8,327,011 - "Streaming Media Buffering System," Issued Dec. 4, 2012
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: This patent addresses the same problem as the ’141 Patent: the need for an internet streaming experience with the immediacy and continuity of traditional broadcast media, free from frustrating buffering delays and jitter (’011 Patent, col. 7:15-24).
- The Patented Solution: The patent focuses on the media player itself within a client-pull architecture. The claimed player is programmed to request a predetermined number of media elements from a source, store them, maintain a record of the serial number of the last element received, and repeatedly transmit requests for subsequent elements to maintain its buffer. This active requesting by the player is what enables the system to manage data flow and recover from interruptions (’011 Patent, col. 13:12-67, col. 8:31-40).
- Technical Importance: The invention defines the client-side intelligence and behavior necessary to enable a robust, user-controlled streaming experience over an unreliable network (Compl. ¶8).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-4 (Compl. ¶¶66, 72).
- Independent Claim 1 (Media Player):
- A media player with a processor, memory, and network connection.
- Player software with instructions to request a predetermined number of media data elements from a media source.
- Instructions to receive and store the data elements in memory.
- Instructions for a player buffer manager to maintain a record of the serial number of the last data element received.
- Instructions to play the media data elements sequentially from the buffer.
- Instructions to repeatedly transmit requests to the media source for subsequent media data elements to maintain the number of elements in the player buffer.
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,185,611 - "Streaming Media Delivery System," Issued May 22, 2012
- Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses playback interruptions in streaming media by having a server send an initial set of media elements at a rate more rapid than the playback rate, which serves to fill a buffer on the user's device. After this initial fill, the server sends subsequent elements at or about the playback rate, with the user's buffer providing protection against network interruptions (Compl. ¶81; ’611 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims" of the patent without specifying an independent claim (Compl. ¶81).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendants' servers used for desktop platforms that allegedly "send initial streaming media elements to Players at an initial sending rate more rapid than the playback rate" to fill a buffer (Compl. ¶¶30, 81).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,364,839 - "Streaming Media Delivery System," Issued Jan. 29, 2013
- Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system to achieve fast startup and recovery by employing a buffering scheme on the server. The server loads a buffer with media data, sends an initial amount of that data to a player at a rate more rapid than playback, and thereafter sends further data at about the playback rate to maintain the stream (Compl. ¶86; ’839 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims" of the patent (Compl. ¶86). Subsequent to this filing, numerous claims were cancelled in IPR proceedings.
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendants' servers used for desktop platforms that allegedly "load a buffer on the server with streaming media data elements" and "send an initial amount of streaming media elements to Players at an initial sending rate more rapid than the playback rate" (Compl. ¶¶30, 86).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The accused instrumentalities are the internet streaming services and underlying computer and network infrastructure operated by Defendants, which deliver live webcam performances on websites including cams.com and penthouse.com (Compl. ¶¶1, 15, 21).
Functionality and Market Context
- Defendants' infrastructure receives live video feeds from performers and redistributes them in real-time to large audiences (Compl. ¶21). The complaint alleges that this infrastructure uses two different delivery schemes. One scheme, for mobile platforms, is accused of infringing the ’141 and ’011 patents (Compl. ¶29). A second scheme, using the RTMP protocol for "Desktop" platforms, is accused of infringing the ’611 and ’839 patents (Compl. ¶30).
- The complaint alleges that Defendants' business success is substantially attributable to their capability to deliver streaming media in a "responsive, smooth, and scalable manner" made possible by the patented technology (Compl. ¶19). Defendants are alleged to have over 16 active sites and 8 million members, generating hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue (Compl. ¶16). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’141 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| providing a server programmed to receive requests from the user system for media data elements corresponding to specified serial identifiers | Defendants' servers receive requests from users for media elements, which are identified by serial identifiers assigned by the servers (Compl. ¶43). | ¶43 | col. 13:21-30 |
| and to send media data elements to the user system responsive to said requests, at a rate more rapid than the rate at which said streaming media is played back by a user | The server mechanism provides for a "fast start of streaming playback," which allows a Player to moderate media flow by "pulling" data as needed (Compl. ¶43). | ¶43 | col. 13:30-34 |
| and providing a machine-readable medium accessible to said user, on which there has been recorded software for implementing a media player... programmed to cause the media player to maintain a record of the identifier of the last data element that has been received... | Defendants, through their servers, "direct and control users' Players" by providing "Player Software" that causes Players to "maintain a record of the data elements already received" (Compl. ¶45). | ¶45 | col. 13:39-44 |
| and to transmit requests to the server to send one or more data elements, specifying the identifiers of the data elements... | The Player Software provided by Defendants causes Players to "request the data elements from the servers, by their identifiers" (Compl. ¶45). | ¶45 | col. 13:44-49 |
’011 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| media player software comprising instructions to cause the media player to request from the media source a predetermined number of media data elements | Defendants' servers send electronic instructions causing Players to load Player Software, which then requests serialized streaming transmissions from the servers (Compl. ¶67). | ¶67 | col. 13:12-20 |
| instructions to cause the media player to receive media data elements sent to the media player by the media source and store the media data elements in the memory | The Player receives and stores the serialized streaming transmissions from Defendants' servers (Compl. ¶67). | ¶67 | col. 13:21-25 |
| instructions to implement a player buffer manager... operable to maintain a record of the serial number of the last media data element that has been received and stored in the player buffer | The Player Software contains instructions to maintain a record of the data elements received, and Defendants' servers send data containing the serial identifiers for this purpose (Compl. ¶¶45, 67). | ¶67 | col. 13:30-36 |
| instructions to cause the media player to transmit to the media source a request to send one or more media data elements... and to repeat transmitting the requests... so as to maintain the pre-determined number... | The Player Software, under the control of Defendants' servers, uses serial identifiers to "request streaming media elements," thereby controlling the operation of the Players to maintain a buffer (Compl. ¶¶67, 45). | ¶67 | col. 13:59-67 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The complaint's theory of infringement for the '141 and '011 patents depends on actions taken by both Defendants' servers and software on an end user's device. This raises the question of whether Defendants' alleged "directing and controlling" of users' Players (Compl. ¶¶45, 67) is sufficient to attribute the actions of the user's device to Defendants for the purpose of direct infringement, a common issue in divided infringement analysis.
- Technical Questions: A key factual question for all asserted patents is whether the accused systems transmit data "at a rate more rapid than the... playback rate" as claimed. The complaint makes this allegation (Compl. ¶¶43, 81, 86), but the degree to which this is a deliberately engineered feature versus a natural consequence of TCP/IP protocols on a high-bandwidth connection may be a central point of dispute.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’141 Patent
The Term
"at a rate more rapid than the rate at which said streaming media is played back by a user" (Claim 1)
Context and Importance
This limitation is central to the patent's proposed solution for quickly filling a user's buffer to prevent interruptions. Proving that the accused system functions in this specific manner is critical to the infringement case. Practitioners may focus on this term to distinguish the claimed invention from systems that merely transmit data at a variable rate dictated by network conditions.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests sending data "as fast as the data connection between the server and the user computer will support," which would inherently be more rapid than a lower-bitrate media stream (’141 Patent, col. 8:56-62).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The context of building up a buffer over a period of time (e.g., "the user's buffer is built up while the audio is playing") could support an interpretation requiring a designed, sustained period of faster-than-playback transmission, not merely incidental packet bursts (’141 Patent, col. 10:48-50).
For the ’011 Patent
The Term
"maintain a record of the serial number of the last media data element that has been received" (Claim 1)
Context and Importance
This term defines the core client-side intelligence that enables the player to request the correct subsequent data elements. The nature of this "record" will be a key issue for determining infringement.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself does not specify a particular data structure, suggesting that any form of tracking, such as a pointer or a variable in memory that stores the last received number, could meet the limitation (’011 Patent, col. 13:30-36).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A party might argue that the term, read in light of the overall system's goal of "uninterrupted playback," implies a robust record-keeping mechanism capable of handling out-of-order packets and re-requests, potentially narrowing it beyond a simple counter. However, the specification provides limited language to strongly support a narrower construction.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint alleges that Defendants induce infringement of claims directed to the Player Software and the Media Player (’141 and ’011 patents). The allegations are based on Defendants providing video streams "especially adapted" for compatible players, sending "electronic instructions causing the Players to load and execute" the software, and promoting their services for use on mobile devices, thereby intending for users to perform the infringing acts (Compl. ¶¶57-58, 73-74).
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendants' knowledge of the patents as of the "Notice Date" of May 30, 2014, when the original complaint was filed and a demand letter was sent. Plaintiff alleges Defendants continued to infringe after this date without modification, demonstrating reckless disregard (Compl. ¶¶35-36, 92-94).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A threshold issue will be one of case scope: given the post-filing IPR proceedings that cancelled numerous asserted claims from the '141 and '839 patents, a central question is what viable infringement theories remain for the Plaintiff on those patents.
- A key legal question will be one of divided infringement: can the Plaintiff prove that Defendants' servers "direct or control" the actions of end-user players to such an extent that Defendants are directly liable for all steps of methods that are performed jointly by the server and the player software?
- A core evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: does the accused streaming infrastructure deliberately transmit data "at a rate more rapid than... playback" to fill a buffer as the patents claim, or is the transmission speed simply a function of standard network protocols that do not map onto the specific methods recited in the claims?