DCT
1:23-cv-03172
Virtual Creative Artists LLC v. LinkedIn Corp
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Virtual Creative Artists, LLC (Delaware)
- Defendant: LinkedIn Corporation (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Direction IP Law
- Case Identification: 1:23-cv-03172, N.D. Ill., 05/19/2023
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant maintains a place of business in the district and has committed acts of infringement within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s LinkedIn social media platform, specifically its content feed functionality, infringes two patents related to systems and methods for an electronic multi-media exchange.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns online platforms for crowdsourcing, curating, and distributing user-generated media content, a foundational element of modern social media and content-sharing websites.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that the asserted claims in both patents overcame patent eligibility rejections under 35 U.S.C. §101 during prosecution before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. This suggests that patent eligibility may be a central issue in the litigation.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1999-05-05 | Earliest Priority Date for ’480 and ’665 Patents |
| 2012-11-16 | Application Filing Date for ’665 Patent |
| 2016-10-25 | ’665 Patent Issued |
| 2016-11-09 | Date of earliest YouTube video cited as evidence of accused functionality |
| 2016-11-22 | ’480 Patent Issued |
| 2016-2018 | Timeframe alleged for deployment of "Open19 gear" to operate the Accused Instrumentality |
| 2023-05-19 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
The complaint states that U.S. Patent No. 9,477,665 and U.S. Patent No. 9,501,480 share an identical specification (Compl. ¶36). Analysis of the technology described in the specification is therefore applicable to both patents.
U.S. Patent No. 9,501,480 - "Revenue-Generating Electronic Multi-Media Exchange and Process of Operating Same"
- Issued: November 22, 2016
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes a logistical challenge for media companies, which struggle to generate consistently fresh and creative content from a limited pool of professional writers, and an parallel challenge for independent creators who find it difficult to get their ideas and works seen by the industry. (’665 Patent, col. 2:27-56).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes an electronic multi-media exchange that serves as a structured meeting ground for content creators and submitters. (’665 Patent, col. 2:63-67). The system is architected as a set of distinct, interacting computer subsystems: a submissions subsystem to receive content, a creator subsystem to filter and select content, a release subsystem to distribute the developed content, and a voting subsystem to gather audience feedback. (’480 Patent, cl. 1; ’665 Patent, Fig. 2). This structure is intended to manage the entire lifecycle of crowdsourced content, from submission to distribution and monetization.
- Technical Importance: The invention outlines a technical architecture for managing user-generated content at scale, a concept that predates and anticipates the architecture of many modern social media platforms. (Compl. ¶11).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶22).
- Claim 1 of the ’480 Patent recites a computer-based system comprising:
- An electronic media submissions server subsystem with an interface to receive and a database to store electronic media submissions from users.
- An electronic multimedia creator server subsystem, operatively coupled to the submissions subsystem, configured to select and retrieve submissions using an electronic content filter based on user attributes to develop multimedia content.
- An electronic release subsystem, operatively coupled to the creator subsystem, configured to make the developed multimedia content available for viewing on user devices.
- An electronic voting subsystem configured to enable a user to vote for or rate the multimedia content or submissions.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 9,477,665 - "Revenue-Generating Electronic Multi-Media Exchange and Process of Operating Same"
- Issued: October 25, 2016
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As noted above, this patent shares its specification with the ’480 Patent and addresses the same problem of connecting media creators with a broad base of content submitters. (’665 Patent, col. 2:27-56; Compl. ¶36).
- The Patented Solution: The ’665 Patent claims a method for operating the electronic exchange, whereas the ’480 Patent claims the system itself. This method involves a series of specific electronic steps for retrieving, assembling, distributing, and enabling user feedback on media content. (’665 Patent, cl. 1).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶44).
- Claim 1 of the ’665 Patent recites a computer-implemented method comprising the steps of:
- Electronically retrieving a plurality of electronic media submissions from a database using an electronic content filter based on user attributes.
- Electronically generating a multimedia file from the retrieved submissions in accordance with a selected digital format, while maintaining the submitter's identification.
- Electronically transmitting the multimedia file to publicly accessible webservers for viewing on user devices.
- Providing a web-based graphical user interface that enables a user to transmit data indicating a vote or rating for the content.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentality is the LinkedIn website and platform, specifically the system that enables the "personalized LinkedIn Feed." (Compl. ¶22, ¶45).
Functionality and Market Context
- The LinkedIn platform is a computer-based system that allows users to create accounts and post content, including text, images, videos, and links. (Compl. ¶23). This user-submitted content is stored in LinkedIn's databases, which are hosted on servers in its data centers. (Compl. ¶22-23). The system then curates a personalized "Feed" for each user, which is a stream of multimedia content selected and retrieved from the submissions database. (Compl. ¶22).
- The selection of content for a user's feed is performed by an "electronic content filter" that operates based on user attributes such as their professional connections, the users and pages they follow, the groups they have joined, and the hashtags they follow. (Compl. ¶26). The complaint provides a screenshot from a LinkedIn news article that explains this filtering process. (Compl. p. 26).
- The platform also includes features allowing users to "vote for or electronically rate" content by selecting icons such as "like." (Compl. ¶29).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 9,501,480 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| an electronic media submissions server subsystem... configured to receive electronic media submissions from a plurality of submitters over a public network and store said electronic media submissions in said electronic media submissions database... | LinkedIn's servers and databases receive and store user-submitted content (posts containing text, images, videos, etc.) via a submissions interface on its platform. (Compl. p. 11). | ¶23 | col. 7:31-43 |
| an electronic multimedia creator server subsystem... configured to select and retrieve a plurality of electronic media submissions... using an electronic content filter... said filter being based at least in part on at least one of the one or more user attributes to develop multimedia content... | LinkedIn's system selects and retrieves posts to display in a user's "LinkedIn Feed" using a filter based on user attributes like connections, follows, groups, and hashtags. (Compl. p. 26). | ¶26 | col. 8:44-59 |
| an electronic release subsystem... configured to make the multimedia content electronically available for viewing on one or more user devices. | LinkedIn's servers serve the curated multimedia content (the "Feed") to be viewed on user devices like computers and mobile devices when a user logs in. (Compl. p. 33). | ¶28 | col. 4:42-51 |
| an electronic voting subsystem... configured to enable a user to electronic vote for or electronically rate an electronically available multimedia content or an electronic media submission... | LinkedIn provides a graphical user interface with "like" or "thumbs up" icons that allows users to vote for or rate posts within their feed. (Compl. p. 38). | ¶29 | col. 12:1-7 |
Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether LinkedIn’s various server functions, which work together to create a social media feed, constitute the distinct, operatively coupled "subsystems" required by the claim. The defense may argue that LinkedIn operates an integrated platform, not a collection of discrete subsystems as claimed.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the accused system "develops" multimedia content by filtering and arranging posts in a user's feed. (Compl. ¶27). The analysis may turn on whether this on-the-fly curation for an individual user meets the claim requirement of being "configured... to develop multimedia content," which could be construed to imply the creation of a new, distinct media product rather than a personalized stream of existing posts.
U.S. Patent No. 9,477,665 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| electronically retrieving a plurality of electronic media submissions from an electronic media submissions database using an electronic content filter... being based at least in part on at least one of the one or more user attributes... | The LinkedIn system retrieves posts from its submissions database using a filter based on user attributes (connections, follows, hashtags) to populate a user's feed. | ¶47 | col. 8:44-59 |
| electronically generating a multimedia file from the retrieved electronic media submissions in accordance with a selected digital format, wherein the identification of the submitter is maintained with each retrieved submission within the multimedia file... | The LinkedIn system allegedly generates multimedia files (user feeds) displayed on user devices, where each post within the feed maintains the identification of the original submitter. (Compl. p. 70). | ¶48 | col. 4:36-41 |
| electronically transmitting the multimedia file to a plurality of publicly accessible webservers to be electronically available for viewing on one or more user devices... via a web-browser... | LinkedIn's servers transmit the curated multimedia files (feeds) to be viewed on user devices over the internet via a web browser or mobile application. | ¶49 | col. 6:35-42 |
| providing a web-based graphical user interface that enables a user to electronically transmit data indicating a vote or rating for an electronically available multimedia content or an electronic media Submission... | LinkedIn's user interface provides icons (e.g., "like," "thumbs up") allowing users to vote on or rate posts, and this voting data is transmitted to and tracked by LinkedIn's servers. | ¶50 | col. 12:1-7 |
Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A key question may be the definition of "generating a multimedia file." The defense may argue that assembling a dynamic, ephemeral social media feed for a single user is not "generating a multimedia file" in the sense of creating a discrete, persistent data object as the patent may be construed to require.
- Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that a "file" is actually generated? The complaint shows screenshots of a user's feed displayed in a browser (Compl. p. 70), but does not provide technical details on whether this constitutes a single, generated "multimedia file" on the backend or is simply a collection of assets rendered by the client-side browser.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "subsystem" (from ’480 Patent, claim 1)
Context and Importance: This term is foundational to the structure of the asserted system claim. The infringement case depends on mapping the various functions of the LinkedIn platform to the claimed "submissions," "creator," "release," and "voting" subsystems. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether a functionally integrated platform like LinkedIn can be found to infringe a claim structured around discrete, coupled modules.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims define the subsystems functionally (e.g., "configured to receive," "configured to select"). This may support a construction where any server or group of servers performing the recited function qualifies as the claimed "subsystem," regardless of its integration with other functions.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 2 of the patent depicts a "Central Controller" with distinct databases for each function (e.g., "Submission Database," "Creator Database," "Points/Voting Database"). (’665 Patent, Fig. 2). This could support a narrower construction requiring physically or logically distinct hardware or software modules, rather than merely different functionalities within a monolithic architecture.
The Term: "electronically generating a multimedia file" (from ’665 Patent, claim 1)
Context and Importance: The infringement theory for the method claim hinges on this step. Plaintiff alleges that the creation of a user's LinkedIn Feed constitutes the generation of a multimedia file. The case may turn on whether a dynamic, personalized data stream delivered to a browser qualifies as a "file."
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification discusses the "development" of "content" which is then "released to an audience." (’665 Patent, col. 4:36-46). This could be interpreted broadly to cover the assembly and presentation of content in a feed format.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim requires generating a "file" from "retrieved submissions," which is then "transmitted." This language may suggest the creation of a new, unitary data object on a server that is subsequently sent to the user, as opposed to the server sending a set of instructions and discrete content items that are assembled into a "feed" by the user's browser.
VI. Other Allegations
The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of indirect or willful infringement.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be patent eligibility: Do the patents’ claims, which are directed to a structured system for managing user-submitted content, represent a patent-eligible improvement to computer functionality, or do they claim the abstract idea of crowdsourcing and curating content using conventional computer components, raising questions under 35 U.S.C. § 101?
- A core question will be one of architectural scope: Can the integrated functions of a modern social media platform be mapped onto the distinct "subsystems" recited in the ’480 patent's system claim, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the claimed modular architecture and the accused product's implementation?
- A key technical question will be one of definitional scope: Does the on-the-fly, personalized assembly of a social media "feed" for display in a user's browser constitute "electronically generating a multimedia file" as required by the '665 patent's method claim, or does the term "file" imply the creation of a discrete, persistent data object?