Ruling to Impact Acacia Case, EFF Attorney Says

WASHINGTON — In a decision of particular interest to online adult companies, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled earlier this week that courts should look to the language in the patent itself rather than turn first to dictionaries to determine the meaning of patent claims.

The ruling is expected to have direct impact in the infringement case brought on by Acacia Technologies against online adult companies, an Electronic Frontier Foundation official told XBiz.

“The new Federal Circuit decision will make it even harder for Acacia to show its patents are valid,” EFF staff attorney Jason M. Schultz told XBiz. “[U.S. District Court] Judge [James] Ware has already indicated that most of the Acacia patents are too vague and unclear to be valid, and the new Federal Circuit decision reinforces the notion that if you didn't disclose something in your patent, you can't sue people for infringing it. That looks exactly like what Acacia has done.”

After several years of litigation against more than a dozen adult companies, Acacia Technologies, a division of Newport Beach, Calif.-based Acacia Research Corp., is continuing its suit over its patented technology, called Digital Media Transmission. The intellectual property licensing firm has five U.S. patents that cover the transmission and receipt of digital audio and video content.

Acacia legal counsel Robert Berman did not respond to repeated XBiz inquiries on the impact of this week’s ruling by the federal appeals court.

In the case decided this week, an en banc panel of the appeals court addressed the issue of dictionary use in Phillips vs. AWH, 03-1269.

The Federal Circuit, which ultimately decides most contentious patent cases, embraced dictionary definitions in a 2002 decision, Texas Digital Systems vs. Telegenix, 308 F.3d 1193.

But since then the court has been split — some of the panels have ruled that dictionary definitions should be the first source for construing the meaning of a word in a patent claim while others have relied on both the written description of the invention and dialogue between patent applicants and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office interpreting the scope of the patent.

In this week’s 38-page decision, the Federal Circuit found fault with the Texas Digital ruling.

“The methodology [the Texas Digital] adopted placed too much reliance on extrinsic sources such as dictionaries, treatises and encyclopedias and too little on intrinsic sources, in particular the specification and prosecution history,” Judge William Bryson wrote for the 10-to-2 panel. “The main problem with elevating the dictionary to such prominence is that it focuses the inquiry on the abstract meaning of words rather than on the meaning of claim terms within the context of the patent.”

Some lawyers say the Federal Circuit has brought back some sense of predictability in patent cases with the decision, as it realigned itself with the U.S. Supreme Court's 1996 ruling in Markman vs. Westview Instruments, 517 U.S. 370, which directed courts to look first at intrinsic evidence in determining the scope of a claim and then turn to extrinsic evidence.

“Texas Digital had turned Markman on its head, and the court today set it back upright,” patent attorney Theodore Herhold told the Recorder, a San Francisco-based legal newspaper. Herhold filed an amicus brief for Visa U.S.A. Inc. and others in the Phillips case.

In a dissent, Judge Haldane Mayer wrote that “the main problem with elevating the dictionary to such prominence is that it focuses the inquiry on the abstract meaning of words rather than on the meaning of claim terms within the context of the patent.”

“While this court treats the district court as an intake clerk, whose only role is to collect, shuffle and collate evidence, the reality, as revealed by conventional practice, is far different,” Mayer wrote. “We simply must follow the example of every other appellate court, which, regarding the vast majority of factual questions, reviews the trial court for clear error.”

In the Phillips case, the en banc panel concluded that the district court and a panel of the Federal Circuit had too narrowly interpreted the term in finding AWH did not infringe the patent and remanded the case back to the district court to address the infringement claims. Inventor Edward Phillips claimed that AWH infringed his patent on steel-shell panels resistant to vandalism. The case centered on the meaning of the term “baffles.”

Copyright © 2024 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

Justices Alito, Thomas Invoke Victorian-Era Morality Law, Raising Censorship Concerns

Several national publications reported this week on widespread concern among Free Speech advocates after U.S. Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas repeatedly invoked during a hearing the infamous segregation-era law the Comstock Act, which was the cornerstone of U.S. censorship of sexual material from the 1870s until the 1970s.

Skinfluential Management's FansFuel Acquires Fanwire

Creator stats and affiliate marketing platform FansFuel has acquired creator account management tool Fanwire.

Nebraska AV Bill Moves Forward Despite Privacy, Free Speech Concerns

Nebraska’s unicameral Legislature has given first-round approval to LB 1092, the state’s version of the age verification bills being sponsored around the country by anti-porn religious conservative activists.

AEBN Celebrates 25th Anniversary

The Adult Entertainment Broadcast Network (AEBN) is celebrating its 25th year in business this week.

Performers in Meta Blacklisting Lawsuit Seek to Preserve Antitrust Claims

Adult Performance Artists Guild board officers Alana Evans, Kelly Pierce and Ruby have informed a California court that, although they want to drop their lawsuit claiming that Meta conspired with OnlyFans to blacklist rival premium fan platforms’ talent, they may still pursue antitrust claims in the future.

FSC, Co-Plaintiffs to Ask US Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Texas Age Verification Law

Free Speech Coalition (FSC) and its co-plaintiffs in the challenge to Texas’ controversial age verification law have petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to stay its recent decision upholding the law, because they intend to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to review the law’s constitutionality.

FSC Vows to Fight Florida Age Verification Law

Free Speech Coalition (FSC) has issued a statement vowing to continue fighting Florida’s new age verification law, which was signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday as part of a comprehensive bill targeting minors’ use of social media.

Kansas Republican Aims to Create New Bureaucracy to 'Investigate' Porn Websites

Republican state legislators succeeded Monday in moving forward Kansas’ version of the age verification bills being sponsored around the country by anti-porn religious conservative activists, despite serious concerns raised by House Democrats about the cost of establishing a new bureaucracy tasked with investigating websites for pornographic content.

SK Intertainment Launches 'Skinfluential Management' Agency, FansFuel Joint Venture

Mr. Skin/Mr. Man parent company SK Intertainment has launched new creator agency Skinfluential Management, as well as a new joint venture with Showbizz Media's creator stats and affiliate marketing platform, FansFuel.

Industry Attorney, Free Speech Champion Clyde DeWitt Passes Away at 75

Noted industry attorney Clyde DeWitt passed away on Friday in Las Vegas at 75, according to friends and colleagues.

Show More