DCT

1:16-cv-00453

Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:16-cv-00453, D. Del., 06/17/2016
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged in the District of Delaware based on Defendant's incorporation in the state and its transaction of business within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s online multiplayer games, including World of Warcraft, Destiny, and Call of Duty, infringe six patents related to networking technology for broadcasting information and managing connections between participants in a network.
  • Technical Context: The patents address methods for creating reliable and efficient peer-to-peer or quasi-peer-to-peer networks for real-time data sharing, a foundational technology for modern large-scale online multiplayer gaming.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint states that this lawsuit is a re-filing of a prior case (1:15-cv-00228), which was filed on March 11, 2015, and subsequently dismissed for lack of prudential standing. Plaintiff alleges that a new agreement with the original patent assignor, The Boeing Company, has cured this standing issue. The prior lawsuit and subsequent service of claim charts are cited as the basis for alleging willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2000-07-31 Patent Priority Date (’344, ’966, ’147, ’634, ’069, ’497 Patents)
2004-03-02 U.S. Patent No. 6,701,344 Issued
2004-03-30 U.S. Patent No. 6,714,966 Issued
2004-05-04 U.S. Patent No. 6,732,147 Issued
2004-12-07 U.S. Patent No. 6,829,634 Issued
2005-06-21 U.S. Patent No. 6,910,069 Issued
2005-07-19 U.S. Patent No. 6,920,497 Issued
2015-03-11 Plaintiff filed initial complaint against Defendant
2015-11-02 Plaintiff served an Identification of Accused Products and Patents
2016-03-02 Plaintiff served claim charts on Defendant
2016-06-03 Prior case dismissed for lack of prudential standing
2016-06-17 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,701,344 - "DISTRIBUTED GAME ENVIRONMENT"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent's background describes the limitations of existing network architectures for applications requiring simultaneous information sharing among many users, such as online games (Compl. ¶ 13). Specifically, it notes that client-server models create performance bottlenecks and single points of failure, while standard peer-to-peer connections are difficult to manage as the number of participants grows (’344 Patent, col. 2:7-13, 2:57-61).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a "logical broadcast channel" that overlays a standard point-to-point network like the Internet (’344 Patent, Abstract). Instead of a central server, each computer (or "participant") connects to a set number of "neighbors" (e.g., four). To broadcast a message, an originating computer sends it only to its neighbors, who then propagate it to their other neighbors, ensuring the message reaches everyone on the channel reliably and efficiently (’344 Patent, col. 4:21-39). This creates a resilient, decentralized network structure, depicted as a "4-regular and 4-connected" graph (’344 Patent, Fig. 1).
  • Technical Importance: This approach aimed to provide the scalability and reliability needed for large-scale, real-time distributed applications without the high overhead of multicasting protocols or the performance limitations of a centralized server architecture (’344 Patent, col. 2:14-22).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint alleges infringement of at least one claim (Compl. ¶ 47). Assuming assertion of the first independent claim, Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
    • A computer network for providing a game environment for a plurality of participants.
    • Each participant having connections to at least three neighbor participants.
    • An originating participant sends data to other participants by sending it through each of its connections to its neighbor participants.
    • Each participant sends data it receives from a neighbor participant to its other neighbor participants.
    • The network is "m-regular," where m is the exact number of neighbor participants.
    • The number of participants is at least two greater than m, resulting in a "non-complete graph."

U.S. Patent No. 6,714,966 - "INFORMATION DELIVERY SERVICE"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the general technical challenge of creating a reliable and scalable communications network for the simultaneous sharing of information among a large number of widely distributed processes (’966 Patent, col. 2:38-44).
  • The Patented Solution: The ’966 Patent describes the same core technical solution as the ’344 Patent: a broadcast channel implemented as a graph of point-to-point connections overlaying an underlying network (’966 Patent, col. 4:1-20). The focus is broadened from a "game environment" to a general "information delivery service," but the underlying mechanism of propagating messages from neighbor to neighbor to achieve a broadcast-like effect remains the same (’966 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: The technology provides a generalized framework for creating decentralized broadcast networks suitable for various applications beyond gaming, such as collaborative processing or content distribution, that require timely data dissemination to many participants (’966 Patent, col. 1:39-44).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint alleges infringement of at least one claim (Compl. ¶ 58). Assuming assertion of the first independent claim, Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
    • A computer network for providing an information delivery service for a plurality of participants.
    • Each participant having connections to at least three neighbor participants.
    • An originating participant sends data to other participants through its connections to its neighbors.
    • Each participant sends data received from a neighbor to its other neighbor participants.
    • The network is "m-regular," where m is the exact number of neighbor participants.
    • The network is an "incomplete graph."

U.S. Patent No. 6,732,147 - "LEAVING A BROADCAST CHANNEL"

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the problem of maintaining network integrity when a participant disconnects. The solution involves the departing computer sending a disconnect message to its neighbors, allowing them to establish new connections with each other to "heal" the hole left in the network graph (’147 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least one method claim is asserted (Compl. ¶ 68).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Call of Duty infringes by allowing players to leave a game mid-match without affecting other players, which suggests a network-healing mechanism (Compl. ¶¶ 40, 73). A screenshot in the complaint shows a "Leave Game" option in the Call of Duty multiplayer menu (Compl. p. 18).

U.S. Patent No. 6,829,634 - "BROADCASTING NETWORK"

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes the core broadcasting network technology with a focus on its non-routing-table-based nature. It discloses the method of broadcasting data where a participant sends received data to its other neighbors, creating reliability in the network (’634 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least one claim is asserted (Compl. ¶¶ 82-84).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the WoW Client Downloader and Voice Chat functionalities, as well as general multiplayer modes in Destiny and Call of Duty, which allegedly create network reliability by passing data between neighboring players (Compl. ¶¶ 82-84).

U.S. Patent No. 6,910,069 - "JOINING A BROADCAST CHANNEL"

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent details a method for adding a new participant to an established broadcast network without high overhead. The technique involves identifying a pair of existing connected participants, disconnecting them from each other, and then connecting the new participant to each of them, a process the patents call "edge pinning" (’069 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least one method claim is asserted (Compl. ¶ 92).
  • Accused Features: The accused features are multiplayer modes where participants can be added to the network, such as WoW's Cross-Realm modes that allow players from different servers to form groups (Compl. ¶ 95).

U.S. Patent No. 6,920,497 - "CONTACTING A BROADCAST CHANNEL"

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent focuses on the initial step of joining the network. It describes a method where a "seeking computer" uses a "portal computer" to find and connect to the broadcast channel. This is facilitated by the seeking computer using a selected "call-in port" to request that the portal coordinate its connection (’497 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least one method claim is asserted (Compl. ¶ 105).
  • Accused Features: The complaint targets features like the WoW Game Client and Launcher, which it alleges use a portal computer to connect to the game network (Compl. ¶ 35, 108).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are Defendant’s online multiplayer games World of Warcraft (WoW), Destiny, and the Call of Duty series, specifically Advanced Warfare and Black Ops III (Compl. ¶ 6).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges these products are large-scale multiplayer online games that rely on the patented networking technology to function (Compl. ¶ 6). WoW is described as operating across over 240 different "realms" (servers), with "Cross-Realm" technology allowing players from different realms to communicate and play together, allegedly forming an "overlay network topology of server-to-server connections" (Compl. ¶ 29). A screenshot from a WoW guide explains that realms are used to divide the player population and keep the experience "stable, smooth, and consistent" (Compl. p. 7).
  • Destiny is alleged to use a "hybrid system" combining dedicated servers with a peer-to-peer network connecting players within a game area, utilizing "on-the-fly matchmaking technology" to allow players to interact (Compl. ¶ 36).
  • Call of Duty is described as providing various multiplayer modes where teams of players interact and communicate (Compl. ¶ 39). The complaint also points to specific functionalities like WoW's peer-to-peer downloader, voice chat in multiple games, and the ability for players to join and leave game sessions without disrupting the overall match (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 34, 40).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references but does not attach claim chart exhibits. The following tables summarize the infringement allegations for the lead patents based on the narrative descriptions provided in the complaint.

  • '344 Patent Infringement Allegations
Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A computer network for providing a game environment for a plurality of participants Defendant's WoW, Destiny, and Call of Duty products provide multiplayer gaming environments for numerous individual players. ¶46, ¶47, ¶48, ¶49 col. 30:26-28
each participant having connections to at least three neighbor participants Players, via their computers and/or the servers they connect to, are connected to other players/servers in the network to enable communication and data transfer. ¶47, ¶48, ¶49 col. 30:28-30
an originating participant sends data... through each of its connections to its neighbor participants In multiplayer modes, a player's actions (data) are communicated to other players by being sent over the network connections. ¶47, ¶48, ¶49 col. 30:30-34
each participant sends data that it receives from a neighbor participant to its other neighbor participants Information is allegedly propagated through the network on a point-to-point basis from one participant to the next to effect a broadcast. ¶13, ¶47 col. 30:34-37
the network is m-regular... and a non-complete graph The complaint alleges that the accused games utilize multiplayer or multisystem network technology as claimed in the patents, which describes such a network topology. ¶6, ¶29 col. 30:38-43
  • '966 Patent Infringement Allegations
Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A computer network for providing an information delivery service for a plurality of participants Defendant's games provide services like voice chat, game updates via a downloader, and player location/action data, which constitute information delivery. ¶58, ¶59, ¶60 col. 30:22-25
each participant having connections to at least three neighbor participants Individual players in multiplayer modes are connected to communicate and interact over a computer network. ¶58, ¶59, ¶60 col. 30:25-27
an originating participant sends data... through each of its connections to its neighbor participants Data, such as voice chat or game updates, is sent from one user's client to others in the network. ¶58, ¶60 col. 30:27-31
each participant sends data that it receives from a neighbor participant to its other neighbor participants Information is sent on a point-to-point basis and allegedly propagated through neighbor participants. ¶58, ¶60 col. 30:31-35
the network is m-regular... and an incomplete graph The complaint alleges the accused products' network architecture embodies the patented invention. ¶6, ¶57 col. 30:35-38
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A primary question may be whether the term "participant," as described in the patent in a peer-to-peer context, can be construed to read on the server-based architecture alleged for WoW, where "realms" are distinct servers (Compl. ¶ 29). The dispute may center on whether a "server" can be a "participant" or "neighbor participant" in the manner claimed.
    • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that the accused games use a "broadcast technique" where information is sent on a "point-to-point basis" through neighbors (Compl. ¶¶ 47, 58). A key technical question will be whether the accused products' network traffic actually propagates from client-to-client or server-to-server in the specific neighbor-to-neighbor-to-neighbor manner required by the claims, or if they use a more traditional client-server or hub-and-spoke model for data distribution.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "participant"

  • Context and Importance: The definition of "participant" is central to the dispute. The patents describe a network of peer computers. The accused products, particularly WoW, are alleged to involve a network of servers ("realms") as well as player clients. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could determine whether the claims read on a hybrid client-server architecture or are limited to a pure peer-to-peer system.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent states that a "participant" is a "process executing on a computer" (’966 Patent, col. 30:52-53), which could be argued to include server-side processes as well as client-side game applications.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's detailed description consistently frames the technology in terms of "host computers" and "processes executing on... computers" that connect as peers, often in the context of end-user applications like network meetings or games (’344 Patent, col. 4:8-10, col. 15:61-66). This context may support a narrower construction limited to end-user nodes.

  • The Term: "sends data that it receives from a neighbor participant to its other neighbor participants"

  • Context and Importance: This claim language describes the core data propagation mechanism of the invention. The infringement case depends on whether the accused products actually perform this step-by-step relay function. Practitioners may focus on this term because it defines the specific technical operation that distinguishes the patented method from conventional client-server data distribution.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent abstract describes the technique as "effectively" providing a broadcast channel, which may suggest that any network topology that achieves a similar result could be covered, regardless of the precise implementation (’344 Patent, Abstract).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and figures explicitly illustrate a process where a computer receiving a message from one neighbor "sends the message to its three other neighbors" (’344 Patent, col. 4:32-34; Fig. 24). This may support a narrow construction requiring a literal relay of received data packets to all other connected peers, as opposed to a server simply sending individualized data streams to multiple clients.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For the method claims in the ’147, ’069, and ’497 Patents, the complaint alleges infringement based on Defendant's "own actions and/or its actions in combination with the actions of users" (Compl. ¶¶ 68, 92, 105). It alleges Defendant has "direction or control over users' performance" through its Terms of Use, which require users to use Defendant's software to access online features (Compl. ¶¶ 69, 93, 106).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for all six patents. The basis is Defendant's alleged knowledge of the patents and their infringement for "more than one year" prior to the complaint's filing date, stemming from the initial lawsuit filed on March 11, 2015 (Compl. ¶¶ 52, 63, 76, 87, 100, 113). The complaint also cites the service of infringement contentions and claim charts on November 2, 2015, and March 2, 2016, respectively, as further evidence of pre-suit knowledge (Compl. ¶ 52).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "participant," as used in the patents' peer-to-peer context, be construed to cover the server-centric "realm" architecture alleged to be used by World of Warcraft, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the claimed peer network and the accused client-server system?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: what evidence will be presented to show that the accused games' networking systems perform the specific "neighbor-to-neighbor" data propagation required by the claims, as opposed to using a more conventional architecture where a central server manages data distribution to all connected clients?
  • A third question will be one of divided infringement: for the asserted method claims, do the facts alleged in the complaint sufficiently establish that Defendant exercises the requisite "direction or control" over its users' actions to be held liable for direct infringement when users perform some of the claimed steps?