Virtual Creative Artists LLC v. Homeawaycom Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Virtual Creative Artists, LLC (Delaware)
  • Defendant: Homeaway.com, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Direction IP Law
• Case Identification: 6:24-cv-00063, W.D. Tex., 02/01/2024
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant’s principal place of business being located in Austin, Texas, which is within the Western District of Texas.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Vrbo and HomeAway online vacation rental platforms infringe two patents related to systems and methods for creating and distributing user-submitted multimedia content.
• Technical Context: The technology concerns early Internet-era systems for crowdsourcing, processing, and distributing user-generated content, a concept foundational to many modern web platforms.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that the asserted claims in both patents-in-suit previously overcame patent eligibility rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 during prosecution before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Case Timeline

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,501,480 - Revenue-Generating Electronic Multi-Media Exchange and Process of Operating Same

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent describes a technical problem from the early internet era: media companies faced a "logistical nightmare" managing a high volume of unsolicited artistic submissions (e.g., scripts, songs), while creators found it difficult to get their work seen by the right contacts (’480 Patent, col. 1:48-57). The complaint characterizes the problem as developing a system to allow remote contributors to collaborate in developing new media content (Compl. ¶11).
• The Patented Solution: The invention is a computer-based system comprised of four distinct, interacting subsystems designed to manage this process. A "submissions server subsystem" receives content from users; a "multimedia creator server subsystem" selects and retrieves submitted content using filters; an "electronic release subsystem" makes the resulting content available for viewing; and an "electronic voting subsystem" allows an audience to rate the content (Compl. ¶12; ’480 Patent, FIG. 2).
• Technical Importance: The claimed system provides a structured, networked framework for what is now commonly known as crowdsourcing or user-generated content, predating many modern platforms with similar concepts (Compl. ¶11).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶22).
• Claim 1 requires a computer-based system comprising:
  • An electronic media submissions server subsystem configured to receive and store electronic media submissions from a plurality of submitters.
  • 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 multimedia content electronically available for viewing.
  • An electronic voting subsystem configured to enable a user to electronically vote for or rate the multimedia content or an electronic media submission.

U.S. Patent No. 9,477,665 - Revenue-Generating Electronic Multi-Media Exchange and Process of Operating Same

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The ’665 Patent shares an identical specification with the ’480 Patent and thus addresses the same technical problem of managing and utilizing user-submitted creative content (Compl. ¶36).
• The Patented Solution: Unlike the system claimed in the ’480 Patent, the ’665 Patent claims a method, or process, for generating multimedia content. The claimed method involves the steps of electronically retrieving submissions from a database using a filter, generating a multimedia file from those submissions while maintaining submitter identification, transmitting that file to webservers for viewing, and providing a graphical user interface for users to vote on or rate the content (Compl. ¶37).
• Technical Importance: This patent claims the operational process of a crowdsourcing platform, complementing the system architecture claimed in the related ’480 Patent.

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶44).
• Claim 1 requires an electronic 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, wherein submitter identification is maintained.
  • Electronically transmitting the multimedia file to a plurality of publicly accessible webservers for viewing on user devices.
  • Providing a web-based graphical user interface that enables a user to electronically transmit data indicating a vote or rating for the content.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The HomeAway.com and Vrbo.com websites, mobile applications, and associated computer systems ("Accused Instrumentality") (Compl. ¶22, ¶44).

Functionality and Market Context

The Accused Instrumentality is an online platform that enables property hosts (submitters) to create and publish "Rental Listings" for short-term or long-term stays. Hosts upload multimedia content, including images and textual descriptions of the property, location, price, and amenities (Compl. ¶22, ¶45). A screenshot provided in the complaint shows the user interface for adding photos to a property listing (Compl. p. 17). The platform then makes these listings available for other users (travelers) to search, view, and book. Travelers can filter search results based on user attributes such as price, location, and number of bedrooms, and can later submit ratings and reviews for properties (Compl. ¶26, ¶29).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 9,501,480 Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A primary question may be whether a "Rental Listing" on a vacation platform constitutes "multimedia content" as the term is used in the patent, which focuses its background discussion on creative works like scripts and music. Similarly, it raises the question of whether a traveler's star rating and review constitutes the "voting" for or "rating" of that content as contemplated by the patent.
  • Technical Questions: The claim requires distinct "subsystems." The complaint alleges the accused platform uses "separate server subsystems" (Compl. ¶22), but a point of contention may be whether the accused cloud-based architecture has the discrete, structurally-defined subsystems recited in the claim or if it is a more integrated system.

U.S. Patent No. 9,477,665 Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: As with the ’480 Patent, a key question may be whether the process of assembling and displaying a webpage for a rental listing constitutes "electronically generating a multimedia file" in the creative sense described in the patent's specification.
  • Technical Questions: The analysis may focus on whether the accused method's output is a "multimedia file" in a "selected digital format." A question for the court could be whether rendering a standard webpage from database elements meets this limitation, or if the claim requires the creation of a discrete, downloadable file in a specific format (e.g., a video or composite image file).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "multimedia content"

• Context and Importance: This term appears in the independent claims of both asserted patents. Its construction is critical to the infringement analysis, as the dispute may center on whether a commercial "Rental Listing" falls within the scope of "multimedia content." Practitioners may focus on this term because the patent's specification heavily emphasizes creative and artistic works.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification lists examples of content that may include "digital photographs," "print media like calendars," and "greeting cards" (’480 Patent, col. 3:36-39), which could suggest a meaning broad enough to encompass a commercial listing composed of photos and text.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s background section frames the invention in the context of the "television industry," "movies, music," "scripts, songs and other artistic submissions" (’480 Patent, col. 1:19-57). The abstract also focuses on a "process for creating media content," suggesting an active, creative process rather than a static commercial listing.

• The Term: "[server] subsystem"

• Context and Importance: Claim 1 of the ’480 Patent requires four distinct "subsystems" (submissions, creator, release, and voting). The definition of this term is central to determining if the accused platform's architecture meets the structural limitations of the claim. Defendant may argue its architecture is an integrated whole, not a collection of discrete subsystems.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not explicitly define "subsystem" as requiring physically separate hardware. The claims describe the subsystems by their function and their operative coupling, which could support an interpretation where logical or functional software modules on a distributed system satisfy the limitation.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s figures, such as FIG. 2, depict distinct databases (e.g., "Submission Database," "Creator Database," "Points/Voting Database") and processors for different functions (’480 Patent, FIG. 2). This could support a narrower construction requiring some degree of structural separation beyond mere logical distinction.

VI. Other Allegations

The complaint does not contain allegations of indirect or willful infringement.

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

The resolution of this dispute may turn on the court's interpretation of several key technical and legal questions:

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "multimedia content," rooted in the patent's description of creative works like screenplays and music, be construed to cover the commercial vacation rental listings presented on the accused Vrbo platform?
• A second key question will be one of structural correspondence: does the Defendant's allegedly integrated, cloud-based architecture map onto the four distinct "submission," "creator," "release," and "voting subsystems" required by the system patent, or is there a fundamental mismatch in technical architecture?
• A central evidentiary question for the method patent will be one of technical equivalence: does the accused system's process of assembling and displaying a standard webpage from database records constitute "electronically generating a multimedia file," as claimed, or does it perform a different, conventional web-serving function that falls outside the claim's scope?