patent

court-rules-against-activision-blizzard-in-$23.4m-patent-dispute

Court rules against Activision Blizzard in $23.4M patent dispute

pay up —

Activision plans appeal, says it uses different network tech in its games.

Acceleration Bay says <em>World of Warcraft</em>‘s networking code infringes on a patent originally filed by Boeing.” src=”https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/wowcrowd-800×450.png”></img><figcaption>
<p><a data-height=Enlarge / Acceleration Bay says World of Warcraft‘s networking code infringes on a patent originally filed by Boeing.

Activision Blizzard

A jury has found Activision Blizzard liable for $23.4 million in damages in a patent infringement lawsuit first brought to court in 2015.

The case centers on patents first filed by Boeing in 2000, one that describes a “distributed game environment” across a host and multiple computers and another that describes a simple method for disconnecting from such a network. Those patents were acquired in 2015 by Acceleration Bay, which accused Activision Blizzard of using infringing technology to develop World of Warcraft and at least two Call of Duty titles.

Those accusations succeeded in court earlier this week, as a jury found a “preponderance of evidence” that the patents were infringed. The decision came following a one-week trial in which Activision Blizzard argued that its networking technology works differently from what is described in the patents, as reported by Reuters.

“While we are disappointed, we believe there is a strong basis for appeal,” an Activision Blizzard spokesperson said in a statement to the press. “We have never used the patented technologies at issue in our games.”

Acceleration Bay’s website describes it as an “incubator and investor” that wants to “nurture, protect, and support the dissemination of technological advancement.” But the company’s only currently listed venture is Edge Video, a “Web 3 Video Network” that provides crypto rewards and “AI-driven shopping” opportunities through interactive video overlays.

In a 2019 counterclaim stemming from a similar patent case (which was dismissed in 2020), Epic Games argued that “Acceleration engages in no business activity other than seeking to enforce the Asserted Patents.” Epic also said at the time that “Acceleration has asserted the same six patents against other major videogame publishers, even though Epic can see no applicability of the claimed technology to the videogame industry.”

Acceleration Bay has outstanding patent cases against Electronic Arts, Take-Two, and Amazon Web Services, among others.

In 2021, Activision Blizzard won a longstanding infringement suit brought by Worlds, Inc. over a patent for a “system and method for enabling users to interact in a virtual space.” In dismissing that case, US District Judge Denise J. Casper wrote that “client-server networks, virtual worlds, avatars, or position and orientation information are not inventions of Worlds” and that its patented technology was not “inherently inventive or sufficient to ‘transform’ the claimed abstract idea into a patent-eligible application.”

Court rules against Activision Blizzard in $23.4M patent dispute Read More »

apple-watches-being-pulled-from-stores-this-week-due-to-potential-import-ban

Apple Watches being pulled from stores this week due to potential import ban

Apple v. Masimo —

Ban on Watch Series 9, Watch Ultra 2 starts Dec. 26 if Biden doesn’t intervene.

Apple Watch Series 9

Enlarge / The Apple Watch Series 9 released in September 2023.

Apple

Apple will pause sales of the Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 starting December 21, it revealed today in a statement to 9to5Mac. The move comes as the products are facing a potential import ban until August 2028, due to rulings that the watches infringe on patents from Masimo.

In October, the US International Trade Commission (ITC) upheld a January ruling that Apple Watches with pulse oximeter features infringe on two Masimo patents. Since then, the case has been under a 60-day Presidential Review Period, which ends December 25. After that date, the watches are subject to an import ban until the patents’ expiration in 2028.

Apple told 9to5Mac:

While the review period will not end until December 25, Apple is preemptively taking steps to comply should the ruling stand. This includes pausing sales of the Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 from Apple.com starting December 21, and from Apple retail locations after December 24.

The Apple Watch SE will remain available since it doesn’t have the blood oxygen sensor technology under dispute, which Apple debuted with the Apple Watch Series 6 in 2020.

Since the ITC’s ruling is still under presidential review, President Biden may decide to veto the ruling, saving the Apple Watch from an import ban. However, we’ve already seen Biden decline to veto an ITC ruling that the Apple Watch infringes on electrocardiogram sensor-related patents owned by AliveCor. (The Apple Watch wasn’t banned related to that because the US Patent and Trademark Office revoked the patents in question, a decision that AliveCor is appealing.)

People can still buy the watches from third-party retailers for now. But if the ITC’s ruling isn’t vetoed, then, come December 25, Apple won’t be able to sell the watch to other retailers, like Best Buy, anymore.

Apple’s statement today noted that it “strongly disagrees” with the ITC’s ruling and is “pursuing a range of legal and technical options to ensure that Apple Watch is available to customers.”

“Should the order stand, Apple will continue to take all measures to return Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 to customers in the U.S. as soon as possible,” Apple said.

Apple said it would appeal the ITC’s ruling on December 26 if the Presidential Review Period ends without a veto. But the watches would still be subject to the import ban.

A long battle

California-based Masimo has alleged that Apple started engaging in discussions with the company in 2013 under the premise of a potential partnership. However, Masimo claims that Apple ended up poaching some of its workers and tech. Apple previously claimed that Masimo was only “one of many medical-technology companies” that it met with during that time and that it never partnered with Masimo because it wasn’t consumer-focused.

As of this writing, Masimo’s “consumer health” website includes a handful of products. That includes the Masimo W1 health-tracking watch, against which Apple filed a patent infringement case in 2022 [PDF]. And if that’s not enough litigious beef between these two, Masimo also has a case against Apple filed in the US District Court in the Central District of California in early 2020, as noted by 9to5Mac.

While Apple is announcing some preemptive moves today, don’t expect the battle to be over. Apple made $39,845,000 [PDF] in wearables, home, and accessories sales for fiscal year 2023, (which ended September 20). There are numerous stakeholders—from suppliers to third-party retailers—invested in Apple producing flagship smartwatches.

Apple has alluded to numerous paths it can take to keep its watches alive, from more litigation to seeking new technologies. But it’s also possible that Masimo and Apple try to end their battle by working out some sort of licensing agreement.

Apple Watches being pulled from stores this week due to potential import ban Read More »