Internet Media Interactive Corp v. As Brewing Collaborative LLC

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Internet Media Interactive Corp. (Delaware)
  • Defendant: A&S Brewing Collaborative LLC (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: O'KELLY, ERNST & JOYCE LLC; Haller Law PLLC
• Case Identification: 1:18-cv-00893, D. Del., 06/15/2018
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because the Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company and therefore resides in the state.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s online advertising methods, which utilize shortened URLs to redirect users, infringe a patent related to providing access to internet locations via unique "jump codes."
• Technical Context: The technology concerns early World Wide Web navigation systems designed to simplify user access to websites with long or complex addresses, predating modern search engines.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint states that in a prior proceeding on January 4, 2009, the District of Delaware construed several key phrases from the patent-in-suit. These prior constructions will likely play a significant role in defining the scope of the asserted claims in the current litigation.

Case Timeline

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

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,049,835, "System For Providing Easy Access To The World Wide Web Utilizing A Published List Of Preselected Internet Locations Together With Their Unique Multi-Digit Jump Codes," issued April 11, 2000.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: In the mid-1990s, the World Wide Web was expanding rapidly, but finding useful content was difficult and accessing sites often required users to type long, complex, and error-prone Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) ('835 Patent, col. 4:56-65). The patent describes a need for a curated directory of useful sites and a more efficient way to access them ('835 Patent, col. 4:10-22).
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system where a "published compilation," such as a printed book, lists pre-selected, reviewed websites alongside a unique, short "jump code" for each ('835 Patent, col. 5:51-57). A user accesses a single, predetermined "specialized Web site" (e.g., "JumpCity"), enters the jump code from the book into an on-screen form, and software on the specialized site automatically converts the code into the full URL and redirects the user's browser to the desired destination ('835 Patent, Abstract; col. 7:1-10). This process obviates the need for the user to ever type the full, complex URL ('835 Patent, col. 5:65-67).
• Technical Importance: The system offered a simplified, user-friendly shortcut mechanism for navigating the then-disorganized web, analogous to a speed-dial function for websites.

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent method claim 11.
• The essential elements of Claim 11 are:
  • publishing a compilation of preselected Internet locations, which includes a unique predetermined multi-digit jump code for each location.
  • providing a predetermined Internet location (a jump site) that has means for capturing the jump code.
  • a user accessing the predetermined Internet location and entering the jump code.
  • receiving the entered jump code.
  • converting the jump code to a corresponding URL address.
  • automatically accessing the desired location using the converted URL.
• The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused instrumentality is Defendant's method of advertising for its "Coney Island" brand, particularly through its Twitter account "@ConeyIslandBeer" and other online media (Compl. ¶6).

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges that Defendant's advertisements constitute a "published compilation" of information (Compl. ¶13.a). These advertisements include shortened URLs (e.g., from the service bit.ly) which, when clicked, redirect users to a target website (Compl. ¶13.c). The complaint identifies the link shortening service itself (e.g., bit.ly) as the "predetermined Internet location" and the alphanumeric string within the shortened URL (e.g., "29hpZwh") as the "unique predetermined multi-digit jump code" (Compl. ¶13.b, ¶13.c).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

Claim Chart Summary

Identified Points of Contention

• Scope Questions: The complaint's theory raises several questions about claim scope. Does the phrase "published compilation", described in the patent primarily as a curated book, read on a series of individual social media advertisements? Does the term "multi-digit jump code", construed previously as "more than one number," read on an alphanumeric string such as "29hpZwh"?
• Technical Questions: A central technical question is whether a user clicking a single, pre-packaged shortened URL constitutes the multi-step sequence recited in the claim: first "accessing" a predetermined location, and then separately "entering" a jump code into it. The complaint's infringement theory relies on bundling these distinct claim steps into a single user click and attributing actions performed by third parties (the user and the link-shortening service) to the Defendant.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The Term: "a unique predetermined multi-digit jump code"

• Context and Importance: This term's construction is critical because the complaint alleges that alphanumeric strings in modern shortened URLs (e.g., "29hpZwh") meet this limitation (Compl. ¶13.b). The complaint notes a prior construction defining it as "a unique predetermined code consisting of more than one number," which raises the question of whether letters can be considered "numbers" in this context.
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not explicitly define "digit." A party could argue that in computer science, alphanumeric characters can be considered "digits" in a hexadecimal or other base-N numbering system.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly refers to a "four-digit jump code" ('835 Patent, col. 5:46, 6:66), and dependent claim 19 explicitly recites "a four digit number." This language may support a narrower construction limited to numerals 0-9.

The Term: "publishing a compilation of preselected Internet locations"

• Context and Importance: The viability of the infringement claim depends on whether Defendant's series of tweets or other online advertisements can be considered a "compilation" as claimed. The complaint relies on a prior construction of a similar phrase as "a publicly accessible collection of information" (Compl. ¶13.a).
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The prior construction's use of "publicly accessible collection" could be argued to encompass any set of publicly available data, such as a company's Twitter feed over time.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s primary embodiment is a curated, printed publication like a book (110) or a consolidated "on-line list" within the jump site itself, which suggests a deliberately assembled and organized collection rather than an ad-hoc stream of advertisements ('835 Patent, col. 5:51-57, col. 7:63-65).

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

• The complaint frames its allegations as direct infringement under the "divided infringement" doctrine articulated in Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (Compl. ¶14). It alleges that Defendant is liable for the entire method because it directs or controls the actions of the other participants. Liability for the user's step is based on Defendant allegedly conditioning a benefit (e.g., a promotional offer) on the user's performance, and liability for the link-shortening service's steps is based on an alleged agreement (terms of service) between Defendant and the service provider (e.g., Bitly) (Compl. ¶13.d-g).

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

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "multi-digit jump code", rooted in the patent's context of numeric codes and previously construed to mean a code of "more than one number," be interpreted to read on the alphanumeric strings used in modern URL shorteners?
• A second key question involves functional and legal liability: does a user clicking a single, pre-formed shortened URL constitute the distinct, sequential claimed steps of 'accessing' a location and then 'entering' a code? This factual analysis is intertwined with the legal question of whether Defendant can be held directly liable for actions performed by both end-users and a separate, third-party link-shortening service under a divided infringement theory.
• The case will also likely turn on the interpretation of "published compilation": does a series of ephemeral social media posts meet the definition of a "compilation" as contemplated by a patent whose specification heavily emphasizes a curated, organized, and reviewed list of websites, akin to a printed guide book?