AltNet and parent Brilliant Digital Entertainment want their pounds of licensing patent flesh from peer-to-peer networks: The pair claims several American-based P2P networks, including LimeWire, BearShare, and Mashboxx, are using technology patented by AltNet and Brilliant Digital, and have sent them letters all but demanding they sign licensing deals or else.
The news was greeted somewhere between surprise and amusement by P2Pnet.net, which has also called AltNet “the virtual originator” of spyware. “Altnet's bid to 'persuade' anyone, or anything, with p2 (fill in the blanks) in its name to pay for its elderly TrueNames hash patent is starting to look like it's a phishing exercise akin, almost, to Nigeria's 419 scams,” the peer-to-peer news site wrote.
The hash technique involves assigning unique tags or “hashes” to digital files, which let file-swap programs process user requests for specific files.
Several recipients of the recent crop of letters have noted that in response to the warning, they are discussing ways to go forward with a legal challenge rather than honor Altnet's claims, according to news reports.
“Under the latter, industrious scribes in the African country send out messages designed to hook the unwary into paying for, well, nothing,” the site continued. “Under the former, an industrious scribe representing Altnet sends out messages designed to hook the unwary into paying for, well, nothing.”
An attorney for AtlNet and Brilliant, Lawrence Hadley, told the Washington Post that the P2P networks – whom he wouldn’t name – were “using our technology. We just want them to pay us a reasonable fee for it,” and added that copies of the demand went to “most” of the major P2P networks in the U.S.
And since AltNet is allied to KaZaA, the current kingpin of the P2P world, some analysts say the demand for licensing of the TrueNames patent might cause further strains between KaZaA and its peers.
The AltNet/Brilliant demand included this passage: “Based upon our investigation, we believe that other peer-to-peer applications, including applications offered by your company, use the technology claimed in the Data Distribution Patents for identifying, accessing, and distributing data items between computers. Accordingly, we believe that your company requires a license from BDE and Altnet to continue practicing the ‘791 and ‘280 Patents with your company’s peer-to-peer application.”
"They're using our technology. We just want them to pay us a reasonable fee for it," said Lawrence Hadley, counsel for Altnet and Brilliant. Hadley wouldn't name the networks targeted by the letters, but said copies had gone out to most of the major peer-to-peer developers in the United States.
P2Pnet.net said AltNet and Brilliant might be trying to panic the lesser-known players like LimeWire, BearShare, and Shareaza into “throwing money at AltNet,” which is now a partner with KaZaA and its parent Sharman Networks as well as Brilliant, with all three on trial in Australia where that country’s music industry is challenging them for copyright infringement.
“Ironically, all three companies have been trying to convince the major studios and record label cartel that they’d make ideal business partners,” P2Pnet.net said. “The entertainment industry, however, continues to treat them with deep contempt.”
Freenet author Ian Clark has called TrueNames a lame duck patent predated by a vast enough volume of prior art that anyone challenging the patent could probably win that challenge. AltNet could risk “wast(ing) a lot of money, and at the end of all that, los(ing) their patent” if they pursue such an aggressive licensing campaign, Clark told p2pnet.net.
This isn’t the first time AltNet and Brilliant Digital have tried stopping others from using the patent. In December, they sued the Recording Industry Association of America, claiming the music industry group – currently somewhat infamous for litigation to stop P2P swappers – used the hash technology they claim to disrupt P2P file transmission.
