Press Releases related to Intellectual Property
EFF Urges Court to Protect Innovation in Arista v. Lime Wire
Copyright Law Should Not Chill Development of Emerging Technologies
New York - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and a coalition of groups representing both consumers and industry filed an amicus brief today in the first major lawsuit since MGM v. Grokster against a creator of peer-to-peer (P2P) filesharing software, warning that the case has profound implications for the development of new software and hardware.
In Arista v. Lime Wire, the recording industry plaintiffs seek to hold Lime Wire liable for acts of copyright infringement by users of its software. In its amicus brief, EFF urges the court to apply the law in a manner that will not chill technological innovation and to reaffirm that developers should not be held liable for copyright infringement based on misuses of their technology that they did not actively promote.
“It’s crucial that courts continue to protect emerging technologies that are capable of substantial lawful uses, even if they also can be used in less acceptable ways,” said EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. “The technology industry, consumers, and copyright owners have all benefited from innovations like the photocopier, the CD burner, the iPod, and the personal computer, notwithstanding the fact that all of them can be misused.”
The Lime Wire lawsuit is the latest in a series of lawsuits filed by the recording industry against peer-to-peer filesharing software companies, including past lawsuits against Grokster, Aimster, and Napster.
“Ordinary tasks like offering technical support shouldn’t lead to ruinous copyright liability just because it turns out that some customers are applying a multi-use tool to unlawful purposes,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Michael Kwun. “For example, Adobe shouldn’t have to quiz me to ensure I have the rights to the photo I’m editing before it answers my questions about how to use Photoshop.”
Joining EFF on the brief are the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Computer and Communications Industry Association, the Consumer Electronics Association, the Home Recording Rights Coalition, the Information Technology Association of America, Public Knowledge, the Special Libraries Association, and the U.S. Internet Industry Association.
For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/Arista_v_Lime_Wi/20081926_EFFAmiciBrie...
Contacts:
Michael Kwun
Senior Intellectual Property Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
michael@eff.org
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
Innocent Customers Potentially Dragged Into Legal Battle Over Satellite TV
EFF Urges Court to Protect Customers' Privacy
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) asked a federal court Friday to reject efforts by Echostar to get the names and addresses of every customer that purchased a free-to-air satellite receiver. Echostar claims that the receiver can be modified to pirate DISH satellite TV programming. EFF argues that Echostar's demand, which seeks all purchasers regardless of whether they actually pirated DISH TV, would violate user privacy and leave innocent purchasers vulnerable to bogus legal threats.
The demand for customer records came up in a lawsuit between Echostar, the company behind the DISH satellite TV service, and Freetech, Inc., the manufacturer of Coolsat free-to-air satellite receivers. As part of the suit, Echostar subpoenaed 17 distributors of Coolsat receivers, demanding the names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and other information of every person who purchased a Coolsat receiver over the last five years.
"Innocent customers should not be dragged into federal litigation just because they bought a product that other, less scrupulous purchasers may be hacking for unlawful purposes," said EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "The court should recognize the privacy interests of these customers, especially since Echostar does not need these customer lists in order to have its day in court against Freetech."
In recent years, satellite TV companies, record labels, and movie studios have all engaged in dragnet litigation tactics that threaten individuals with costly lawsuits unless they pay significant financial sums to "settle" the dispute. These mass litigation campaigns leave innocent consumers trapped between paying a "settlement" for something they did not do or facing even higher legal costs to prove their innocence. Satellite TV provider DirecTV pioneered this approach in 2001, threatening more than 120,000 individuals with legal action and commencing more than 24,000 federal lawsuits, often with no evidence other than the fact that the individual purchased multi-purpose devices that could be used for piracy.
"Once the names of Freetech customers are disclosed to Echostar, there may be little that any court can do to protect these people from harassment, settlement demands, and legal expenses," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "This may be the last chance the court has to protect the privacy of these individuals."
For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/echostar_v_freet/EFFamicusEchostarvFre...
For more on Echostar v. Freetech:
http://www.eff.org/cases/echostar-v-freetech
Contacts:
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org
EFF Takes Aim at Bogus Online Gaming Patent
Illegitimate Patent Chills Innovation in Multi-Player Internet Games
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging a bogus online gaming patent threatening small businesses and innovators of multi-player Internet games.
Sheldon F. Goldberg was awarded the illegitimate patent for the "method and system of playing games on a network," and claims to own rights in all online gaming systems that use tournament-style play, advertising, and have real-time updates of ladder-rankings in multi-player games. Goldberg has used this bogus patent to coerce licensing fees from numerous small businesses, demanding payments that are excessive yet less than potential litigation.
In a reexamination request filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today, EFF and Paul Grewal and Brad Waugh of Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder show that the technology covered by the bogus patent was used extensively by other online gaming companies before Goldberg made his claim.
"The Internet has allowed small businesses and individuals seeking to develop new technologies to operate on a level playing field with larger corporations," said EFF Intellectual Property Fellow Emily Berger. "This equality is threatened by those who seek to procure patents from our government that they were never entitled to hold in the first place."
One of the key sources of information in EFF's reexamination request came from Netrek, one of the first online multi-player games. Netrek primarily consists of open-source software, and its code development has been archived online.
"Real innovation by others suffers in light of meritless claims like those in Mr. Goldberg's patent," said Paul Grewal. "We are confident that the Patent Office will carefully review the arguments we have presented in our petition."
Students from the Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School also carried out extensive research for the reexamination request, helping locate much of the critical evidence of prior use of technologies covered by Goldberg's patent.
This reexamination request is part of EFF's Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects bad patents have on public and consumer interests. So far, the project has killed one patent covering a system and method of creating digital recordings of live performances. Three more reexaminations are underway by the USPTO due to the Patent Busting Project's efforts.
For the full reexamination request: http://w2.eff.org/patent/wanted/sheldon/reexam/goldberg_reexam_request.p...
For more on the Goldberg Patent:
http://w2.eff.org/patent/wanted/patent.php?p=sheldon
For more on the Patent Busting Project:
http://w2.eff.org/patent/
Contacts:
Emily Berger
Intellectual Property Fellow
Electronic Frontier Foundation
emily@eff.org
Paul Grewal
Partner
Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder
pgrewal@daycasebeer.com
EFF Wins Reexamination of Bogus Internet Subdomain Patent
Fourth Successful Challenge from EFF's Patent-Busting Project
San Francisco - San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has won reexamination from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) of a bogus patent on Internet subdomains -- the fourth successful reexamination request from EFF's Patent Busting Project.
The patent, now held by Hoshiko, LLC, claims to cover the method of automatically assigning Internet subdomains, like "action.eff.org" for the parent domain "eff.org." Previous patent owner Ideaflood used this illegitimate patent to demand payment from website hosting companies that offer such personalized domains, including Freehomepage.com, T35 Hosting, and LiveJournal, a social networking site where each of its three million users have their own subdomain.
In the reexamination request, EFF and Rick Mc Leod of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, showed that the method Ideaflood claimed to have invented was well known before the patent was issued. In fact, website developers were having public discussions about how to create these virtual subdomains on an Apache developer mailing list for more than a year before Ideaflood made its patent claim. The open source developers established a public record of the technology development, providing the linchpin to EFF's patent challenge.
"The hard work of open source developers should not be taken out of the public domain and used to threaten other legitimate innovators," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz, who heads EFF's Patent Busting Project. "Fortunately, the open source approach to development helped protect Apache and other web projects by creating the evidence needed to challenge this illegitimate patent."
The challenge to the Ideaflood patent is part of EFF's Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects that bad patents have on public and consumer interests. So far, the project has killed one bogus patent and won reexamination of three others.
"Based on the PTO's initial analysis in the reexamination order, it appears likely that all claims will be rejected in view of the techniques disclosed by Apache developer Ralf Engelschall and others," said Rick Mc Leod, who drafted EFF petition. "We look forward to the PTO's detailed analysis of our request."
For the full reexamination order:
http://w2.eff.org/patent/wanted/ideaflood/re-exam_order.pdf
For more on EFF's Patent Busting Project:
http://www.eff.org/patent
Contacts:
Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org
Rick Mc Leod
Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
rick.mcleod@klarquist.com
EFF Supports Consumer Right To Repair, Resell Patented Goods
Urges Supreme Court to Crack Down on Post-Sale Restrictions
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today urged the U.S. Supreme Court to protect consumers' traditional right to use, repair, and resell the products they own, even if those products are patented. At stake is the enforceability of "single use" and "not for resale" labels on patented products.
The amicus brief -- submitted on behalf of EFF, Consumers Union, and Public Knowledge -- was filed in Quanta v. LG Electronics, currently pending before the Supreme Court. The case will test the vitality of the "patent exhaustion" doctrine, which entitles a consumer to use, repair, or resell patented products that they have purchased.
The issue is of increasing importance to consumers, who often face "single use only" and "not for resale" labels on patented products, interfering with legitimate aftermarkets for parts and service. Lexmark, for example, has used "single use only" labels to limit the market for refilled toner cartridges. Similarly, "not for resale" labels could interfere with used and refurbished product sales on eBay and Craigslist. EFF's brief urges the Supreme Court to prohibit patent owners from using patent infringement suits to enforce these kinds of post-sale use restrictions on the products they sell.
"Patent owners are trying to use 'label licenses' to deprive consumers of their right to use, repair and resell the products they own," said EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "It's time for the Supreme Court to step in and put a stop to it."
The case is No. 06-937. The Solicitor General, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, and Gateway all urged the Supreme Court to review the case, and oral argument is expected in early 2008.
For the full amicus brief:
https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/quanta_v_lg/quanta_amicus.pdf
Contact:
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
EFF Wins Reexamination of Bogus Patent
Patent Office to Take Second Look at Meritless Claims Threatening Mobile Information Access
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has won reexamination from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) of a bogus patent threatening mobile information access. The reexamination order is the third granted by the PTO after challenges from EFF's Patent Busting Project.
NeoMedia Technologies, Inc., claims to own rights to all systems that provide information over computer networks using database-like lookup procedures that rely on scanned inputs, such as a barcode. NeoMedia has used these claims to threaten and sue innovators in the mobile information space. But EFF's reexamination request, filed in conjunction with Paul Grewal and James Czaja of Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder, showed that the functionality covered by NeoMedia's bad patent was repeatedly included as part of prior patent applications from other companies.
"Overbroad and invalid patents threaten to chill important innovations, especially for startups and other nascent entrepreneurs," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "It's important that technology in the public domain stays there."
NeoMedia has the opportunity to file comments defending the patent before the PTO makes its final determination. However, the PTO has narrowed or revoked roughly 70 percent of patents it has decided to reexamine.
"Re-examination is an essential part of the patenting process," said Paul Grewal, a partner at Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder. "We are pleased that the Patent Office has decided to examine NeoMedia's efforts to claim for itself what the public has long enjoyed."
The successful reexamination request for the NeoMedia patent is the latest big victory for EFF's Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects bad patents have on the public interest and innovation. So far, the project has helped kill a bogus patent covering a system and method of creating digital recordings of live performances. The PTO has also granted another EFF reexamination request for an illegitimate patent for online test-taking.
For the full reexamination order:
http://w2.eff.org/patent/wanted/order_granting_reexam_neomedia.pdf
For more information about the NeoMedia patent reexamination:
http://www.eff.org/patent/wanted/patent.php?p=neomedia
For more on the Patent Busting Project:
http://www.eff.org/patent/
For more on Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder:
http://www.daycasebeer.com
Contacts:
Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org
Paul Grewal
Partner
Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder
pgrewal@daycasebeer.com
EFF Wins Protection for Security Researchers
Court Blocks DirecTV's Heavy-Handed Legal Tactics
San Francisco - In an important ruling today, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked satellite television provider DirecTV's heavy-handed legal tactics and protected security and computer science research into satellite and smart card technology after hearing argument from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
The cases, DirecTV v. Huynh and DirecTV v. Oliver, involved a provision of federal law prohibiting the "assembly" or "modification" of equipment designed to intercept satellite signals. DirecTV maintained that the provision should cover anyone who works with equipment designed for interception of their signals, regardless of their motivation or whether any interception occurs. But in a hearing earlier this year, EFF argued that the provision should apply only to entities that facilitate illegal interception by other people and not to those who simply tinker or use the equipment, such as researchers and others working to further scientific knowledge of the devices at issue.
"Congress never meant this law to be used as a hammer on those who use or tinker with new technologies," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "We're pleased the court recognized that researchers need to be protected."
These cases were part of DirecTV's nationwide legal campaign against hundreds of thousands of individuals, claiming that they were illegally intercepting its satellite TV signal simply because they had purchased smart card technology. Because DirecTV made little effort to distinguish legal uses of smart card technology from illegal ones, EFF has worked to limit the lawsuits to only those cases where DirecTV has proof that their signals were illegally received.
"DirecTV always had legal recourse against those who pirate their signal. The ruling today prevents satellite and cable TV companies from piling on excessive damages that would punish and chill legitimate encryption research," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick.
David Price and Trevor Dryer at Stanford Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic also assisted in this case.
For the full opinion from the 9th Circuit:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/directv_v_huynh/directv_ruling.pdf
For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/directv_v_huynh
Contacts:
Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org
Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org
Back to School for Reading, Writing, and RIAA Lawsuits?
EFF Releases Comprehensive Report on Recording Industry's Litigation Campaign
San Francisco - As college students across the country head back to class this fall, they need to worry about more than keeping up on their schoolwork. The Recording Industry of America (RIAA) continues to target college campuses for hundreds of new lawsuits each month. Meanwhile, under pressure from the recording industry, universities are instituting draconian punishments for students suspected of sharing music files. At the same time, the RIAA continues to sue file sharers off campus, with a total tally now exceeding 20,000.
In a report released today, "RIAA v. The People: Four Years Later," the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) provides the only comprehensive look at the four-year litigation campaign waged by the RIAA against music fans. The report traces the RIAA campaign from its beginnings in 2003 against a handful of students at Princeton, Rensselaer Polytechnic, and Michigan Tech to the current spate of "pre-litigation settlement" letters being sent to universities nationwide.
"Despite the RIAA's legal campaign, file-sharing is more popular than ever," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "History will treat this as a shameful chapter in the history of the music industry, when record companies singled out random music fans for disproportionate penalties. Artists must be compensated, but these lawsuits aren't putting money in any creator's pocket."
The crackdown on Internet file-sharing has already driven music fans to technologies that are harder to monitor -- for example, burning and exchanging CDs among friends and sharing on members-only "darknets." EFF calls on universities to help artists get paid for their creative work while protecting their students from costly legal problems. Universities should insist on a blanket license for their students, collecting a reasonable regular payment -- for example, $5 a month -- in exchange for the right to keep sharing music with their classmates.
"This is about money, not morality," said von Lohmann. "With a blanket licensing solution, the RIAA can call off the lawyers and the lobbyists, and universities can get back to education instead of copyright enforcement."
For the full report "RIAA v. The People: Four Years Later":
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/riaa_at_four.pdf
For more on the litigation campaign:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/?f=riaa-v-thepeople.html
FAQ for students faced with "pre-litigation letters":
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAA_v_ThePeople/college_faq.php
Contact:
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
EFF Challenges Bogus Patent on Internet Subdomains
Illegitimate Patent Used to Threaten Website Hosting Companies
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging a bogus patent on Internet subdomains that has been used to threaten small businesses and innovators.
Ideaflood, a self-proclaimed "intellectual property holding company," used this illegitimate patent to demand payment from website hosting companies that offer virtual, personalized subdomains -- like "action.eff.org" for the parent domain "eff.org." But in a reexamination request filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) today, EFF and Rick Mc Leod of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP show that the method Ideaflood claims to have invented was well known before the patent was issued. In fact, website developers were having public discussions about how to create these virtual subdomains on an Apache developer mailing list for more than a year before Ideaflood made its patent claim.
"This illustrates how an open-source project can establish a public record of technology development and thwart invalid patents," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "The public discussions on the Apache and other mailing lists have shown that Ideaflood's patent claims were without merit and that the patent should be revoked before it causes any more damage to innovation on the Internet."
The companies that Ideaflood threatened include Freehomepage.com, T35 Hosting, and LiveJournal, a social networking site where each of its three million users have their own subdomain. The patent has since been reassigned to a company called Hoshiko, LLC.
"Our patent system is intended to encourage innovation, not damage it by encroaching on the public domain," said Rick Mc Leod, who drafted EFF's petition. "Unfortunately, in recent years the PTO has been deluged with applications, making it difficult to determine whether many patents should be issued or rejected. When a 'bad' patent targets something as ephemeral as the Internet, it can be even more difficult to get that patent invalidated. Fortunately, a diligent, prior art searcher sent us a key reference."
The challenge to the Ideaflood patent is part of EFF's Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects that bad patents have on public and consumer interests. So far, the project has killed one bogus patent and requested the reexamination of two others.
For the full reexamination request:
http://www.eff.org/patent/wanted/ideaflood/reexam/ReqReexam_746.pdf
For more on EFF's Patent Busting Project:
http://www.eff.org/patent
Contacts:
Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org
Rick Mc Leod
Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
rick.mcleod@klarquist.com
Online CD Seller Fights Universal's Bogus Infringement Allegations
Record Industry Takes Aim at Right of 'First Sale'
San Francisco - An eBay seller is taking on Universal Music Group (UMG) in court after the record industry giant targeted his online music sales with false claims of copyright infringement.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the San Francisco law firm of Keker & Van Nest LLP are representing Troy Augusto, whose online auctions included sales of promotional CDs distributed by Universal. Augusto does business on eBay under the name Roast Beast Music and specializes in sales of rare and collectible music.
Copyright law's "first sale" doctrine makes it clear that the owner of a CD is entitled to resell it without the permission of the copyright holder. Nevertheless, Universal demanded that eBay take down Augusto's auctions, claiming that CDs marked as "promotional use only" remain the property of Universal and thus can never be resold.
"When a consumer buys a CD, he gets certain rights, including the right to resell it. Universal is mistaken if it thinks that it can trump these rights simply by putting a label on a CD," said Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney. "Universal is trying to unilaterally rewrite copyright law to the detriment of Augusto's legitimate business and the public. Unless this effort is blocked, it could jeopardize not only sales of used CDs, but also libraries, used bookstores, and businesses that rent movies and video games."
In May, Universal filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Augusto. Today, EFF filed papers with the federal court in Los Angeles answering Universal's claims and counter-suing the company for sending bogus "takedown notices" to eBay that resulted in the unwarranted suspension of Augusto's auctions.
This is not the first instance of Universal and its affiliated companies abusing copyright law. Last month, EFF filed suit against Universal Music Publishing Group on behalf of a mom who had a home video yanked from YouTube because a snippet of a Prince song could be heard in the background. In May, UMG made baseless copyright complaints about a video podcast by political blogger Michelle Malkin.
EFF has also fought other efforts to override the first sale doctrine, arguing in 2004 that Lexmark should not be permitted to use a "label license" to prohibit the resale of laser printer toner cartridges.
For the answer and counterclaim:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/umg_v_augusto/20070806_augusto_answer.pdf
For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/umg_v_augusto
Contacts:
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org
