DCT

1:18-cv-01518

TrackTime, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:18-cv-01518, D. Del., 01/08/2020
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because each Defendant is a Delaware entity and is therefore deemed to reside in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ digital media services, including Amazon Music with X-Ray Lyrics and Audible Audiobooks with Whispersync for Voice, infringe patents related to methods for navigating multimedia content by interacting with synchronized text on mobile devices.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue involves creating a data index that links text (such as song lyrics or e-book text) to specific timestamps in corresponding audio or video files, enabling users to jump to a point in the media by touching the associated text on a screen.
  • Key Procedural History: This First Amended Complaint alleges that Defendants had pre-suit knowledge of the patented technology because Defendant Audible repeatedly cited the inventor’s published patent applications as prior art during the prosecution of its own patents for similar technology. The complaint also highlights statements made by Amazon and Audible during their own patent prosecutions and in public marketing, characterizing synchronized text-media navigation as a novel, non-conventional technical improvement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2011-01-03 Priority Date for ’638 and ’978 Patents
2012-09-06 Amazon press release for Whispersync for Voice
2012-09 Kindle Devices with features like Whispersync introduced
2014-10-07 U.S. Patent No. 8,856,638 Issues
2014-10-14 U.S. Patent No. 8,862,978 Issues
2020-01-08 First Amended Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,856,638 - “Methods and System for Remote Control for Multimedia Seeking” (Issued Oct. 7, 2014)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent specification describes prior art multimedia systems, such as those with closed captioning, as lacking interactivity and being difficult to navigate on mobile devices (Compl. ¶25d, citing ’638 Patent, col. 10:32-col. 11:24). It alleges there was no "well-understood, routine, and conventional utility" for using a gesture on displayed text to make the associated multimedia jump to a specific location (Compl. ¶25a, citing ’638 Patent, col. 1:59-62).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention uses a "synchronization index," which is an electronic transcript associating text with corresponding timestamps in a multimedia file (Compl. ¶17; ’638 Patent, Abstract). This index allows a user to perform a gesture on text displayed on a mobile device's touch screen, which triggers a "timecode lookup" to identify the corresponding moment in the media. The system then delivers the multimedia to a device, starting playback from that identified moment ('638 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶17). The patent describes this as a solution providing "convenient navigation within the multimedia by using the text" ('638 Patent, col. 11:28-31).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provided a method for interactive, non-linear navigation of media on mobile devices, which was an improvement over passive text displays or linear tools like scrub bars (Compl. ¶25e, citing ’638 Patent, col. 11:25-31).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 9, and 14 (Compl. ¶¶315, 337, 358).
  • Essential Elements of Independent Claim 1:
    • Providing, to a mobile computing device, information for displaying text from a synchronization index containing an electronic transcript with corresponding audio times.
    • Displaying at least a portion of the text on the device's viewing screen, other than as a web page.
    • Receiving information from the mobile device indicating a user's touch-sensitive gesture on a displayed word or range of words.
    • Performing a timecode lookup using the synchronization index in response to the gesture to associate a time, t1, with the selected text.
    • Delivering multimedia beginning at time t1, where the multimedia corresponds to the selected text.
  • The complaint asserts infringement of claims 1 through 20 (Compl. ¶313).

U.S. Patent No. 8,862,978 - “Methods and Systems for Facilitating an Online Social Network” (Issued Oct. 14, 2014)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The technology builds on the concept of synchronized media by addressing the need to share user interactions within a social or networked context (Compl. ¶¶14, 25i).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention uses a mobile device and a synchronization index to facilitate user annotations (e.g., highlights, notes) on a portion of the synchronized text in response to a gesture (’978 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶422). The core of the patented method is then "communicating said annotation for subsequent retrieval on a second computing device via a network" ('978 Patent, col. 66:1-3). This creates a mechanism for sharing specific, media-linked interactions between users and devices (Compl. ¶21).
  • Technical Importance: This technology enables a social layer over multimedia consumption, allowing users to share and retrieve specific, context-rich annotations tied to precise moments in audio or video content (Compl. ¶21).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶422).
  • Essential Elements of Independent Claim 1:
    • Providing for use on a mobile computing device a synchronization index associated with multimedia.
    • Providing mobile device software configured to receive the index.
    • Recognizing a user's gesture on displayed text to facilitate annotation of a portion of the synchronization index.
    • The software being configured to facilitate this annotation responsive to user input.
    • Communicating the annotation for subsequent retrieval on a second computing device via a network.
  • The complaint asserts infringement of claims 1 through 10 (Compl. ¶420).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are primarily software features within the Amazon ecosystem: the "X-Ray Lyrics" feature in the Amazon Music app and the "Whispersync for Voice" and "Immersion Reading" features that link the Kindle e-book and Audible audiobook platforms (Compl. ¶¶36, 66). The complaint also names Amazon's Kindle hardware devices as part of the infringing system (Compl. ¶313).

Functionality and Market Context

  • X-Ray Lyrics displays song lyrics that scroll in synchronization with the music. The feature allows users to "jump" to a different part of the song by "tapping" a line of lyrics on the touch screen (Compl. ¶36). A screenshot in the complaint depicts the user interface for X-Ray Lyrics on an Amazon Kindle Fire (Compl. p. 14, ¶49).
  • Whispersync for Voice / Immersion Reading is described as an "eBook to audiobook synchronization platform" (Compl. ¶71). It allows a user to "navigate to a portion of an audiobook by using the text of an e-book to 'jump' to a specific portion of the audio" (Compl. ¶67). A screenshot from the complaint shows the Whispersync for Voice interface on an iPad, displaying e-book text with audio controls below it (Compl. p. 19, ¶70).
  • Annotation and Sharing: The complaint alleges that users of the Kindle app can add "bookmarks, notes, and highlights" to e-books, including those enabled with Whispersync. These annotations are "backed up to the Kindle Library in the cloud for subsequent retrieval" and can be "shared with others... via social networking outlets" (Compl. ¶98).
  • The complaint alleges these features are marketed as "key strategic differentiators" and "innovations" to drive sales and subscriptions within Amazon's ecosystem (Compl. ¶¶68, 73, 96).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’638 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
providing, to a mobile computing device, information for displaying on the mobile computing device text from a synchronization index... Defendants provide indexed song lyrics for the X-Ray Lyrics feature and indexed e-book text for the Whispersync for Voice feature. ¶38, ¶90 col. 17:1-12
displaying, after said providing step, at least a portion of said text from a synchronization index on said viewing screen... The Amazon Music app and Kindle app display song lyrics and e-book text, respectively, on the screens of mobile devices. ¶36, ¶70 col. 4:50-54
receiving, from the mobile computing device, information indicating a user's selected mobile computing device touch-sensitive input interface gesture... The accused apps receive user input when a user "taps" on a line of lyrics or uses "gesture controls" on e-book text to navigate. ¶36, ¶69 col. 6:30-41
performing a timecode lookup, using the synchronization index... to associate a time, t1, within multimedia to the selected word or range of words... The complaint alleges the index is used to "jump" to a different portion of the media, which implies a lookup function to find the corresponding time. ¶38, ¶67 col. 4:5-16
delivering multimedia beginning at time t1... wherein said multimedia corresponds to the word or range of words selected by the gesture. Tapping a line of lyrics causes the song to "jump" to that location; using the e-book text navigates the audiobook to the corresponding audio portion. ¶36, ¶67 col. 4:17-22

’978 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
providing for use on a mobile computing device a synchronization index... Whispersync-enabled e-books are formatted with an index to synchronize with the corresponding audiobook. ¶90 col. 17:1-21
providing mobile computing device software, wherein said mobile computing device software comprises executable program code... The accused functionality is delivered through the Amazon Kindle software application. ¶98 col. 49:49-56
wherein performing a user's selected gesture... is recognized by said touch-sensitive input interface to facilitate annotation of a portion of said synchronization index... The Kindle app allows users to add annotations such as bookmarks, notes, and highlights to e-books, including Whispersync-enabled books. ¶98 col. 7:42-49
communicating said annotation for subsequent retrieval on a second computing device via a network. Annotations are "backed up to the Kindle Library in the cloud for subsequent retrieval" and can be shared via social networking outlets. ¶98 col. 7:55-60
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the data files used by Amazon's X-Ray Lyrics and Whispersync for Voice services meet the specific definition of a "synchronization index" as claimed in the patents. The claims require an "electronic transcript" that indicates "respective times" corresponding to words, which suggests a certain level of data granularity that will be a focus of technical discovery.
    • Technical Questions: The infringement theory relies on the accused systems "performing a timecode lookup." What evidence does the complaint provide that this specific technical step occurs, as opposed to an alternative method of linking text to media time? The complaint's allegations are functional, and the actual technical implementation will be a key point of contention.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "synchronization index"

    • Context and Importance: This term is the technological core of both asserted patents. Its construction will be critical for determining whether Amazon's method of storing and linking synchronized text and media data falls within the scope of the claims. Practitioners may focus on this term because the technical details of Amazon's data files will be compared directly against its definition.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent abstract describes the index as comprising "an electronic transcript that indicates text corresponding to audio from the multimedia and respective times within multimedia corresponding to when a word or range of words is audible" (’638 Patent, col. 47:50-55). This language suggests the term could cover various data structures that perform this linking function.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 17 of the patents depicts a very specific, XML-like data structure with tags for lines (<LINE>), individual word start times (<t>), and individual word end times (<end_t>) (’638 Patent, Fig. 17). Defendants may argue that this specific embodiment limits the term to data structures with word-level or similarly granular timestamping.

  • The Term: "annotation"

    • Context and Importance: This term is central to the asserted claim of the ’978 Patent. The infringement allegation hinges on whether adding "bookmarks, notes, and highlights" constitutes "annotation of a portion of said synchronization index" (Compl. ¶98).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification discusses annotation in general terms, stating a user may "annotate the text transcription" (’638 Patent, col. 5:6-8), which could encompass a wide range of user-added marks or data.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The context often discusses annotation in the specific setting of legal transcript review, where annotations are tied to "issue codes" (’638 Patent, col. 6:46-52). A defendant might argue the term is limited to this more formal or structured type of annotation, rather than simple consumer highlighting.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that Audible induces Amazon's infringement of both patents (Compl. Counts III & VI). The basis for these claims is that Audible actively promotes and provides customer support for the accused Whispersync for Voice features, allegedly with knowledge of the patents and with the intent that Amazon's customers would use the features in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶411-412, 476-477).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on both pre-suit and post-suit knowledge. The primary basis for pre-suit knowledge is the allegation that Defendant Audible knew of the inventor's work because it cited the "Evans publications" (applications ancestral to the patents-in-suit) as prior art in at least twenty-nine of its own patent applications, with the first citation occurring as early as March 2013 (Compl. ¶¶128, 133). Post-suit knowledge is based on the filing of the original complaint on October 1, 2018 (Compl. ¶124).

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

  • A key evidentiary question will be one of structural equivalence: Do Amazon's proprietary data formats for X-Ray Lyrics and Whispersync contain the specific structural elements required by the term "synchronization index"—namely, an "electronic transcript" associating "respective times" with words or ranges of words—or is there a fundamental mismatch in data structure and granularity?
  • A central issue for willfulness will be pre-suit knowledge and intent: Can the plaintiff establish that Audible's knowledge of the "Evans publications," cited during its own patent prosecution, constitutes knowledge of the patented technology itself, and does this evidence show that Defendants deliberately incorporated the technology into their products despite a known risk of infringement?
  • A core issue will be one of estoppel and patent eligibility: To what extent can the plaintiff use Defendants' own public statements and patent prosecution histories—which laud synchronized text/media navigation as a non-conventional "innovation" and "key strategic differentiator"—to counter any potential defense that the asserted patents are invalid for claiming nothing more than an abstract or conventional idea?