DCT

5:25-cv-10578

DiStefano Website Innovations LLC v. ByteDance Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
    • Plaintiff: DiStefano Website Innovations, LLC (Florida)
    • Defendant: ByteDance Ltd., ByteDance Pte. Ltd., TikTok Ltd., and Heliophilia Pte. Ltd. (Cayman Islands, Singapore)
    • Plaintiff’s Counsel: ADDYHART P.C.
  • Case Identification: 5:25-cv-10578, E.D. Tex., 10/29/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendants are foreign corporations subject to venue in any judicial district. The complaint further alleges substantial business contacts within Texas, including large office leases in Austin, significant user numbers, and "Project Texas," a partnership with Austin-based Oracle Corporation to store U.S. user data.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ TikTok, CapCut, and Lemon8 mobile applications infringe five patents related to systems and methods for creating web pages with reciprocal links using a graphical user interface.
  • Technical Context: The patents-in-suit relate to early web-development technology from the dot-com era, aimed at simplifying the creation of interlinked websites for users with little to no programming knowledge.
  • Key Procedural History: All asserted patents claim priority to an application filed in June 2000. The complaint notes that during the prosecution of the '316 Patent, the applicant overcame a patent-eligibility rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by arguing that the claims were a technical solution to an internet-centric problem and not merely an abstract idea. The complaint also alleges that Plaintiff provided notice of the allowed '316 patent application and the issued '971 Reissue Patent to Defendants in November 2022, forming the basis for willfulness allegations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2000-06-07 Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2000-06-08 Launch of inventor's website, www.mystickyweb.com
2013-04-02 Issue Date of U.S. Patent No. 8,412,570
2013-11-19 Issue Date of U.S. Patent No. 8,589,222
2015-03-31 Issue Date of U.S. Patent No. 8,996,398
2016-04-12 Issue Date of U.S. Patent No. RE45,971
2017-01-01 ByteDance acquires Musical.ly
2018-01-01 TikTok App launches in the United States
2020-04-10 CapCut App released worldwide
2020-04-01 Lemon8 App first introduced in Japan
2023-02-01 Lemon8 App launched in the United States
2023-09-19 Issue Date of U.S. Patent No. 11,763,316
2024-10-29 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 11,763,316 - "Server system configured to provide graphical user interface for modifying web pages to include hyperlinks"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,763,316, "Server system configured to provide graphical user interface for modifying web pages to include hyperlinks," issued September 19, 2023. (Compl. ¶46; ’316 Patent, cover page).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent's background describes the difficulty faced by average individuals in the early 2000s who wished to create their own web pages but lacked knowledge of HTML or how to post documents to a server computer. (Compl. ¶34; ’316 Patent, col. 2:4-8).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a server-based system with a graphical user interface (GUI) that allows a non-technical user to create and modify web pages. A core aspect of the solution is a method for establishing a "reciprocal arrangement" where a first user's website is modified to include a hyperlink to a second user's website (hosted on the same system), and the second user's website is simultaneously modified to include a reciprocal hyperlink back to the first. (’316 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:15-32).
  • Technical Importance: This approach sought to simplify and automate the creation of interlinked web communities, a manual and technically demanding process at the time of the invention. (’316 Patent, col. 1:33-34).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 3-9, 11, and 13. (Compl. ¶136).
  • Independent Claim 1 recites a method performed by a server system, comprising the essential elements of:
    • Receiving, from a first user via a GUI, a selection of a "web asset" for a "first web site."
    • Receiving an instruction to modify the web asset, and generating an "edited web asset."
    • Forwarding identifiers of other previously-created websites to the first user.
    • Receiving a selection of a "second website" to create a "first hyperlink" from the first web site to the second.
    • Storing information indicating this selection was received.
    • Modifying the first web site to include the edited web asset and the first hyperlink.
    • Modifying the second web site to include a "reciprocal second hyperlink" to the first web site.
    • Serving the modified first web site.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims. (Compl. ¶107).

U.S. Patent No. RE45,971 - "Developing electronic documents providing e-commerce tools"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Reissue Patent No. RE45,971, "Developing electronic documents providing e-commerce tools," issued April 12, 2016. (Compl. ¶47).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the difficulty for non-programmers to create websites with marketing features, such as links from other websites, which were considered crucial for driving traffic and enabling e-commerce. (’971 Patent, col. 2:39-59).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method within a "computer hardware website implementation system" for establishing a "reciprocal arrangement" between two websites. The system creates a "first functional marketing element" (e.g., a hyperlink) on the first website that directs users to the second, and a "second functional marketing element" on the second website that directs users back to the first. (’971 Patent, Abstract; col. 4:1-12).
  • Technical Importance: The technology provided a systematic way to create mutually beneficial marketing links between websites within a closed system, automating a process that otherwise required manual negotiation and implementation. (’971 Patent, col. 3:15-24).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 4 and 8, and dependent claims 9 and 12-13. (Compl. ¶165).
  • Independent Claim 4 recites a method of establishing a reciprocal arrangement, comprising the essential elements of:
    • Registering a second website with the implementation system.
    • Receiving a request from a first user to implement a first website.
    • Receiving the first user's selection of a "second functional marketing element" to be activated on the second website.
    • Establishing a "reciprocal site" in the first website for a "first functional marketing element."
    • Upon activation, causing the first website to implement the first element and the second website to implement the second element, creating reciprocal direction of users.
  • Independent Claim 8 recites a similar method of establishing a reciprocal arrangement between two web pages, comprising:
    • Generating a second functional marketing element associated with a first user for activation on a second web page.
    • Establishing a reciprocal site in the first web page for a first functional marketing element.
    • Implementing the reciprocal arrangement by causing both web pages to implement their respective marketing elements.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims. (Compl. ¶143).

Multi-Patent Capsules

  • U.S. Patent No. 8,996,398: "Reciprocal insertion of links for web pages," issued March 31, 2015. (Compl. ¶48).
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method within a computer hardware system for inserting a "first functional identification element" (link) on a first web page that points to a second web page, and automatically inserting a "second functional identification element" on the second web page that points back to the first. (Compl. ¶174).
    • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-6 and 8. (Compl. ¶189).
    • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the "Follow" function in the TikTok and CapCut apps, which creates a link from a user's "Following" list to another profile and adds the user to the other profile's "Followers" list, infringes this patent. (Compl. ¶175).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,589,222: "User uploaded image within webpage implementation server system," issued November 19, 2013. (Compl. ¶49).
    • Technology Synopsis: The patent claims a method where a server system receives an image from a first entity, generates web pages for first and second entities, and then inserts reciprocal links between them, where the link pointing back to the first entity includes the image it provided. (Compl. ¶193).
    • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-6. (Compl. ¶208).
    • Accused Features: This patent is asserted against the TikTok and CapCut apps, with the infringement allegation focused on how a user's profile picture (the "image") is displayed next to their name in other users' "Followers" lists (the "second functional marketing element"). (Compl. ¶¶194, 197).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,412,570: "Providing recommendations for reciprocal links in website creation system," issued April 2, 2013. (Compl. ¶50).
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method where a system registers first and second users, associates reciprocal marketing elements (links) between their websites, and additionally provides the first user with at least one "recommended website" into which a link can also be reciprocally inserted. (Compl. ¶213).
    • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-8 and 10. (Compl. ¶235).
    • Accused Features: The "Follow" mechanism in TikTok and CapCut is accused of creating the reciprocal links, while the apps' "Suggested accounts" feature is accused of being the "recommended website" functionality. (Compl. ¶¶215-217).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused products are the TikTok, CapCut, and Lemon8 mobile software applications. (Compl. ¶97).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint describes the accused products as applications that allow users to create and share content, such as short-form videos and photos. (Compl. ¶¶98, 101, 102). A core functionality of these apps is the ability for users to create profiles, which the complaint equates to "websites," and to "follow" other users. (Compl. ¶¶112, 113).
  • When a first user follows a second user, the second user's profile appears in the first user's "Following" list, and the first user's profile appears in the second user's "Followers" list. The complaint alleges this two-way relationship constitutes the claimed "reciprocal hyperlink" or "reciprocal arrangement." (Compl. ¶¶116, 146). The complaint includes a diagram showing how a user's profile page contains a list of accounts they are "Following" and a separate list of their "Followers," illustrating the alleged reciprocal link structure. (Compl. p. 34).
  • The complaint alleges the TikTok app is used by over 150 million people in the U.S. monthly and has an estimated 1.5 billion active users worldwide. (Compl. ¶¶100, 100 n.30). CapCut is identified as a popular video editing app with 490 million global users, and Lemon8 is a photo and video-sharing app launched in the U.S. in February 2023. (Compl. ¶¶101, 102).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’316 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
receiving, from a first client device... information indicating a selection of a web asset to be used in a first web site A user on a mobile device selects a photo from their camera roll to use as a profile picture for their user profile (the "first web site"). ¶110 col. 20:64-21:3
receiving, from the first client device and via an editing screen... an instruction to modify the web asset to generate an edited web asset The user is presented with an editing screen where they can crop or otherwise edit the selected photo before saving it as their profile picture. ¶111 col. 21:4-8
forwarding, to the first client device... one or more identifiers respectively associated with one or more previously-created websites The application's server system presents the user with a list of other user profiles (the "previously-created websites") that they can choose to follow. ¶112 col. 21:9-15
receiving, from the first client device... a first identification indicating a selection of a second website from the one or more previously-created websites The user taps the "Follow" button next to another user's profile (the "second website") in the displayed list. ¶113 col. 21:16-23
modifying... the first web site to include the first hyperlink; The followed user's profile is added to the first user's "Following" list, which is part of the first user's profile ("first web site"). ¶116 col. 21:30-32
and modifying... the second web site to include a reciprocal second hyperlink to the first web site The first user's profile is added to the followed user's "Followers" list, which is part of the second user's profile ("second web site"). ¶116 col. 21:33-37
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A primary question may be whether a user profile within a mobile application, created and rendered by proprietary software, constitutes a "web site" or "web page" as those terms are used in a patent with a 2000 priority date that describes its background in terms of HTML documents and browsers (’316 Patent, col. 1:40-42). A related question is whether a "Follow" button and the resulting entries in "Following" and "Followers" lists function as claimed "hyperlinks."
    • Technical Questions: Does the server system's action of adding a user to a "Followers" list constitute "modifying... the second web site to include a reciprocal second hyperlink" as required by the claim? The analysis may focus on whether this is an automatic, reciprocal modification triggered by the first user's action, as the claim structure suggests.

’971 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 4) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
registering the second website with the website implementation system A second user creates an account and profile (the "second website") on the application's server system. The complaint shows a "Sign up" screen as evidence of registration. (Compl. p. 60). ¶147 col. 4:1-2
receiving, by the website implementation system, a request by a first user to implement the first website A first user creates their own account and profile (the "first website"). The complaint points to screens where a user creates a nickname. (Compl. p. 62). ¶148 col. 4:3-4
establishing... a reciprocal site in the first website for a first functional marketing element The server system establishes a "Following" list (the "reciprocal site") within the first user's profile page, which is designated to hold links to other profiles. The complaint provides a screenshot of a "Following" tab. (Compl. p. 64). ¶150 col. 4:8-10
the first functional marketing element directs, via the internet, a second user... to the second website, and the second functional marketing element directs... to the first website A link in the first user's "Following" list takes a visitor to the second user's profile, and a link in the second user's "Followers" list takes a visitor back to the first user's profile. A diagram illustrates this reciprocal flow. (Compl. p. 59). ¶152 col. 4:19-25
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The term "functional marketing element" may be a central point of contention. The question will be whether a simple link to another user's profile in a "Following" list, which serves a social networking function, can be construed as a "marketing" element in the sense intended by the patent. The patent's background discusses marketing in the context of banner ads and promoting e-commerce websites. (’971 Patent, col. 2:43-48).
    • Technical Questions: The claim requires distinct steps of registering a second site, then receiving a request from a first user to implement a first site. The analysis may question whether the sequence of user registrations and "follow" actions in the accused apps aligns with the specific order of operations recited in the claim.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "web site" / "web page"

    • Context and Importance: This term is fundamental to the scope of all asserted patents. Its construction will determine whether the patents, which were written in the context of the traditional, browser-based internet, can read on user profiles within modern mobile applications.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims themselves do not limit the terms to HTML and could be argued to cover any collection of user-associated data served over a network. The patent speaks of a "graphical user interface," which is not inherently limited to a web browser. (’316 Patent, col. 20:64-66).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The background sections of the patents consistently describe the technological environment in terms of the "World Wide Web," "HTML documents," and "browser" software accessing content from a "server computer," suggesting a narrower meaning tied to that specific technology. (’316 Patent, col. 1:33-60).

  • The Term: "hyperlink" / "functional marketing element"

    • Context and Importance: The infringement theories depend on construing the "Follow" action and resulting list entries as these claimed elements. The definition will determine if a social connection in an app is equivalent to a marketing link between websites.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The '316 patent abstract defines the invention in terms of establishing a "reciprocal arrangement" and creating links, without specifying their commercial purpose. A "functional marketing element" could be argued to be anything that "functions" to direct a user from one page to another, thereby "marketing" it.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specifications explicitly discuss "marketing" in the context of "e-commerce," "advertising messages ('banner ads')," and driving consumer traffic to a business, suggesting the term implies a commercial or promotional purpose beyond simple navigation or social connection. (’971 Patent, col. 2:39-48).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not contain separate counts for indirect infringement. However, the prayer for relief requests judgment pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) and/or 271(c). (Compl. p. 116). The factual allegations primarily frame the infringement as being performed directly by "Defendants' servers," but these actions are initiated by user selections, potentially raising questions of divided or indirect infringement.
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement of the ’316 and ’971 Patents. (Compl. ¶¶139, 168). The allegations are based on pre-suit knowledge, asserting that Plaintiff provided notice to ByteDance in November 2022 regarding both the '971 patent and the application that would become the '316 patent, and provided further notice after the '316 patent issued. (Compl. ¶¶137, 166).

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

This dispute may turn on two central questions of scope and one of eligibility:

  1. A core issue will be one of technological translation: can terms like "web site" and "hyperlink", defined in the context of the early 2000s browser-based World Wide Web, be construed to cover "user profiles" and "follow" functions within modern, proprietary mobile applications?
  2. A second key issue will be one of definitional scope: does a social connection, such as adding a user to a "Followers" list, constitute a "functional marketing element" as required by certain claims, a term the patent specification appears to ground in the context of commercial advertising and e-commerce?
  3. An underlying legal question will be one of patent eligibility: given the detailed prosecution history cited in the complaint, Defendants may challenge whether the claims are directed to the abstract idea of creating reciprocal relationships, and if so, whether the claims recite a sufficient inventive concept to be patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.