Phosita IP Blog


As reported by Gamezone on January 4, a new rumor has surfaced about the development of the next generation Xbox, or Xbox 720 – a clever twist on the current Xbox 360 title, due to a patent recently granted to Microsoft. 

United States Patent No. 8,083,593 was issued on December 27, 2011, and describes the implementation of a DVR system allowing for the recording of media, including television programs. The following abstract briefly describes the DVR application as implemented in the new system:

                “An integrated gaming and media experience is disclosed, including recording of content on a gaming console. A digital video recorder (DVR) application running alongside a television client component allows users to record media content on the gaming console. The DVR application also integrates itself with the console menu. Once integrated, users can record media content while playing games. Alternatively, users can record content when the gaming console is turned off. The recorded content can include television programming, gaming experience (whether local or online), music, DVDs, and so on. When in the recording state, users can also switch between various other media modes, whether gaming, television, and so on.”

Although the new Xbox 720 sounds pretty cool, this patent gives rise to yet another issue in the current controversy between Microsoft and TiVo regarding digital video recorder (DVR) technology. As you may have heard, Microsoft filed a lawsuit back in January 2011 and in subsequent motions alleged that TiVo violated seven of Microsoft’s patents concerning digital video recording.  There is currently, however, a stay on the case due to the court’s having granted TiVo’s request for reexamination of the allegedly infringing patents. See Microsoft Corp. v. Tivo Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52619 (N.D. Cal., May 6, 2011).

What really makes this interesting is that AT&T (one of Microsoft’s major customers) was sued in 2009 for infringing TiVo’s DVR patents 6,233,389, 7,493,015, and 7,529,465 which ultimately resulted in a settlement on January 3, 2012.  Forbes reports that TiVo will receive approximately $215 million from AT&T with $51 million up front and recurring quarterly payments until 2018 to cover the rest. To add to the controversy, it has been suggested that Microsoft filed its suit in January 2011 in response to TiVo’s suit against AT&T because AT&T’s technology runs Microsoft’s Mediaroom client software. Thus, it raises the question that since AT&T settled and AT&T’s technology uses Microsoft’s technology, is it still feasible that Microsoft could win its suit against TiVo and be able to defend against TiVo’s counterclaim of patent infringement? Although I have not researched in depth the patents at issue in these cases, the settlement by AT&T, if anything, might shed some light on how Microsoft’s case will unfold once reexamination is complete.
Now back to the important stuff: video games. In light of all this litigation surrounding DVR technology, it seems like the video game community might have to wait even longer than the 2013-2015 projected release date of the Xbox 720 so that Microsoft can incorporate the rumored DVR feature without the risk of impending litigation. If Microsoft ends up winning the suit against TiVo before then, however, I, for one, hope that Microsoft passes some of the winnings on to the consumer in the form of discounted prices for the new system.

 Image by Fanchile on Flickr Creative Commons- some rights reserved.



DC On Film Row

About DC on Film Row

DC on Film Row is a free event space open to everyone in our community.

We like to say that the space is a “home for creatives and innovators, home builders and the homeless, celebrators and the celebrated” so people understand that we are inclusive and want everyone from throughout our community using our space.

Our goal is to celebrate the incredible diversity of creativity, innovation, and passion within Oklahoma City and to provide a venue—free of charge—to those groups and individuals working to bind us all together and make our home a cooler and better place. No strings attached—no extensive rules to follow. We simply ask that all of our neighbors be honored and that all viewpoints be respected. Our criteria for use is simple: If the event, group, or meeting is something which strengthens our community and brings us all together, the space is available for use.

The space has hosted everything from charitable fundraisers to an underground nightclub party to celebrate Canterbury Choral Society’s 45th anniversary season. We host dinners for the OKC homeless population most Monday evenings where upwards of 250 people are served—we provide the space and soft drinks and a local church provides the food. We’ve hosted university planning retreats and monthly local rock concerts.

Every Wednesday, we open up the courtyard for lunch, invite a local food truck to set up outside our gates, and welcome our downtown neighbors into the space for a bit of socialization.

Our never-ending soda fountain seems to be the biggest hit with some of our neighbors while others spend time playing pool or simply chatting about what is happening on the weekend.

For October we turn the space into a haunted house and invite the neighborhood children to come out and trick-or-treat.

Got an idea for how to use the space? Just ask us – we’re almost certain to say yes!

Dunlap Codding Shareholder Douglas J. Sorocco Named A 2016 BTI Client Service All Star

Dunlap Codding Shareholder Douglas J. Sorocco Named A 2016 BTI Client Service All Star

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA—March 1, 2016—Dunlap Codding is pleased to announce that Douglas J. Sorocco has been selected as a 2016 Client Service All Star based on interviews with more than 300 general counsel and legal decision-makers, according to BTI Consulting Group.  Doug was one of only 30 IP attorneys in the country chosen because of their focus on “client needs and goals, thought leadership, business understanding, legal skills, good value and outstanding results.”  BTI president and founder Michael Rynowecer said that one reason these IP attorneys stood out to clients was “because of their ability to provide IP strategy in a way that enhances a company’s goals….These attorneys look beyond the patent, trademark or IP issue in front of them and see the broader perspective….They see the impacts of IP law and where it is headed and provide advice, like when clients ought to change the way they apply for protection to avoid exposure or risk.” 

Dunlap Codding’s Managing Shareholder Nicholas D. Rouse said, “We have always known that Doug sets the gold standard for providing strategic counsel and superlative client service.  All of us at the firm continuously strive to emulate the example he sets.” 

Sorocco practices in the areas of intellectual property, technology, licensing, life sciences and patent law and is involved in counseling and transactional work involving all aspects of intellectual property. He is registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Doug regularly counsels clients in all aspects of intellectual property including acquisition and commercialization of intellectual property, portfolio management, licensing, and transactional matters. He is ranked in the top band of Oklahoma’s top intellectual property practitioners by the highly regarded Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.  He is an adjunct faculty member at the Oklahoma City University School of Law and in the Physiology Department at the University of Oklahoma’s Health Sciences Center.

Dunlap Codding Director Jordan Sigale Quoted in Bloomberg BNA re Patents

Jordan Sigale was quoted in “Stakeholders Agree with Fed. Cir.’s Discount of Severe Patent Exhaustion Consequences,” by Tony Dutra in the February 16 issue of Bloomberg BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal.   Dutra wrote, “The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries received a win with the Federal Circuit majority opinion downplaying the concerns of high-tech sector and retaining its current standards on the reuse and resale of patented products.  Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Impression Prods., Inc., No. 2014-1617 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2016).”    

Dutra went on to say that the majority opinion expressed concern for the “likely disruption” in the drug industry should it change the standards.  Sigale agreed with the court’s view and said, “In the absence of this rule, drug companies would presumably have to minimize the disparity in drug prices between the U.S. and non-U.S. markets….Whether that would result in a benefit to U.S. citizens or a detriment to the rest of the world is the subject of a PhD dissertation.  More importantly for this court, basing any decision on that type of argument would seem more suited for Congress than the judiciary.” 

Dutra wrote, “Sigale…noted that the decision here—sticking with existing standards, absent evidence of serious problems with them—”sounds a lot” like the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Kimble v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC.  Sigale went on to observe that “non-exhaustion of U.S. patent rights based on a first foreign sale enjoys and long and un-varied history.  And notwithstanding that history of non-exhaustion, doomsday predictions have not materialized.”

Emily Campbell Quoted in Bloomberg BNA Article re Warner Bros. Case Against LegendSky

Anandashankar Mazumdar’s January 29 article in Bloomberg BNA, Latest Play in Cat-and-Mouse Game May Be Winner for Warner,” quotes Dunlap Codding Shareholder Emily E. Campbell. 

Mazumdar wrote, “On its face, a recent lawsuit by Warner Bros. and an Intel Corp. licensee of anti-copying technology seems to have a very strong case, according to observers who spoke with Bloomberg BNA. 

Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and Digital Content Protection LLC recently brought claims of violations of the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, 17 U.S.C. §1201, against a Chinese manufacturer of devices that help get around digital locks on what is being called Ultra-HD Blu-ray discs or 4K Blu-ray. Digital Content Protection, LLC v. LegendSky Tech Co. Ltd., No. 15-10169 ( S.D.N.Y. complaint filed December 31, 2015).” 

Campbell commented, “This case is certainly a cat-and-mouse chase played out in real life but, legally speaking, I think Warner Brothers and DCP have a really strong DMCA case…..Taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture, there are arguably some legitimate uses for the devices….This case reiterates how copyright law chases technology and the need for dynamic laws that adapt to advances in technology.”