2002 video streaming patent holder sues Amazon and Twitch
(2023/01/10)
- Reference: 1673343012
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/01/10/bsd_vs_amazon/
- Source link:
Media solutions company BSD Crown, best known for video encoding products as well as building Android smartphones in the Noughties, has filed a lawsuit against Amazon and livestreaming offshoot Twitch, claiming the pair infringed its patent.
The Israeli company, formerly known as Emblaze, previously sued both Apple and Microsoft over the very same video-streaming technology patent – US No 6,389,473 (aka '473), which covers an HTTP livestreaming standard known as HLS.
In a complaint [1]filed [PDF] last week, BSD Crown claimed its patent's use of HTTP instead of other protocols had been "contrarian" at the time. The filing added: "That protocol, in comparison to other others used at the time, was not believed to be optimal to maintain high quality video broadcasts."
[2]
The standard is related to the transmission of real-time audio and video to one or more devices, "where necessary, adjusting video quality based on changing bandwidth."
[3]
[4]
The filing continues that "Amazon.com and Twitch knew, or should have known, that the adaptive multibit rate technology of the '473 patent was foundational to the Amazon and Twitch streaming systems. Even a cursory review of the '473 patent by Amazon and Twitch's patent counsel would have shown that the Amazon (e.g. AWS Elemental Media Services) and Twitch livestreaming systems infringe the '473 patent."
Previous actions
In [5]2010 , Emblaze sued Microsoft for allegedly breaching the patent with its home-brewed Smooth Streaming tech in Silverlight – remember [6]Silverlight ? The parties agreed to drop the suit in 2015.
Emblaze also hit Apple with a sueball that year, accusing it of breaching the patent with HTTP Live Streaming on its iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad as well as the Mac OS X Snow Leopard platform. The claim at the time was that Apple "induced" other media companies, including ESPN, to breach Emblaze's patent on video-streaming technology.
BSD's lawyers noted that the Apple lawsuit went to trial and that in July 2014, the jury found the patent was not invalid, but said it was also "not infringed due to reasons specific to Apple's streaming standard at the time which are not relevant to Defendants' systems and services in this case."
[7]Ancient thumb-driven whirly-wheel smartmobe UI ported to Android
[8]Apple, Microsoft fingered for patent infringement by Emblaze
[9]OpenSilver throws Microsoft Silverlight devs a lifeline as end of support looms – or you could forget it ever happened
[10]Blam! Max Sound flings vid codec sueball number four at Google
In the fresh complaint, BSD claimed that Amazon knew about the '473 patent by at least 2015 or sooner through its own patent filings. On March 2, 2015, Amazon filed its own video streaming patent titled "Processing of Long Running Processes" through the help of its patent lawyers. It claimed there was at least one rejection of a claim based on prior art which included its own patent, stating: "Extensive prosecution history, all primarily based on the '473 Patent, demonstrates that at least Amazon.com had knowledge of the '473 Patent."
Emblaze was founded in 1994 and, BSD claims in the suit, innovated streaming technology that now "powers the majority of live broadcasts."
We've asked Amazon for comment. ®
Get our [11]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2023/01/09/bsd_v_amazon_3-23-cv-00057.pdf
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2010/02/11/emblaze_infringement_claim_apple_microsoft/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/16/opensilver_silverlight/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2013/05/13/else_releases_splay_port_android/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2010/02/11/emblaze_infringement_claim_apple_microsoft/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/16/opensilver_silverlight/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2014/12/12/max_sound_sues_google_youtube_mannheim/
[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
The Israeli company, formerly known as Emblaze, previously sued both Apple and Microsoft over the very same video-streaming technology patent – US No 6,389,473 (aka '473), which covers an HTTP livestreaming standard known as HLS.
In a complaint [1]filed [PDF] last week, BSD Crown claimed its patent's use of HTTP instead of other protocols had been "contrarian" at the time. The filing added: "That protocol, in comparison to other others used at the time, was not believed to be optimal to maintain high quality video broadcasts."
[2]
The standard is related to the transmission of real-time audio and video to one or more devices, "where necessary, adjusting video quality based on changing bandwidth."
[3]
[4]
The filing continues that "Amazon.com and Twitch knew, or should have known, that the adaptive multibit rate technology of the '473 patent was foundational to the Amazon and Twitch streaming systems. Even a cursory review of the '473 patent by Amazon and Twitch's patent counsel would have shown that the Amazon (e.g. AWS Elemental Media Services) and Twitch livestreaming systems infringe the '473 patent."
Previous actions
In [5]2010 , Emblaze sued Microsoft for allegedly breaching the patent with its home-brewed Smooth Streaming tech in Silverlight – remember [6]Silverlight ? The parties agreed to drop the suit in 2015.
Emblaze also hit Apple with a sueball that year, accusing it of breaching the patent with HTTP Live Streaming on its iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad as well as the Mac OS X Snow Leopard platform. The claim at the time was that Apple "induced" other media companies, including ESPN, to breach Emblaze's patent on video-streaming technology.
BSD's lawyers noted that the Apple lawsuit went to trial and that in July 2014, the jury found the patent was not invalid, but said it was also "not infringed due to reasons specific to Apple's streaming standard at the time which are not relevant to Defendants' systems and services in this case."
[7]Ancient thumb-driven whirly-wheel smartmobe UI ported to Android
[8]Apple, Microsoft fingered for patent infringement by Emblaze
[9]OpenSilver throws Microsoft Silverlight devs a lifeline as end of support looms – or you could forget it ever happened
[10]Blam! Max Sound flings vid codec sueball number four at Google
In the fresh complaint, BSD claimed that Amazon knew about the '473 patent by at least 2015 or sooner through its own patent filings. On March 2, 2015, Amazon filed its own video streaming patent titled "Processing of Long Running Processes" through the help of its patent lawyers. It claimed there was at least one rejection of a claim based on prior art which included its own patent, stating: "Extensive prosecution history, all primarily based on the '473 Patent, demonstrates that at least Amazon.com had knowledge of the '473 Patent."
Emblaze was founded in 1994 and, BSD claims in the suit, innovated streaming technology that now "powers the majority of live broadcasts."
We've asked Amazon for comment. ®
Get our [11]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2023/01/09/bsd_v_amazon_3-23-cv-00057.pdf
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y71FTeZp0DIfHGWv69Ao5QAAABA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2010/02/11/emblaze_infringement_claim_apple_microsoft/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/16/opensilver_silverlight/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2013/05/13/else_releases_splay_port_android/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2010/02/11/emblaze_infringement_claim_apple_microsoft/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/16/opensilver_silverlight/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2014/12/12/max_sound_sues_google_youtube_mannheim/
[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Patently
Furious Reg reader John
At least patents have a 20 year expiry date. Copyright lasts much, much longer.
Patents usually involve lots of R&D spend. Copyright tends to be much cheaper.
Why bother making anything new if all your competitors could then copy it without the R&D cost?
Patently
How these things are being patented?
Anyone facing the problem would have arrived at it using common sense. Someone who merely was one of the first having to solve it should have never been granted a patent.
The whole business of patents is basically made for the rich to profiteer and should be scrapped.