If you thought the streaming media patent battle was intriguing, how about a patent battle over one of the Internet's core image compression technologies? That's what looks to be brewing now that the owner of the joint photographic experts group - that's .jpeg or .jpg, for you image hunters and makers and collectors - is suing a gross of companies for infringing the patent in question.
The suer is Compression Labs. The targets - to name just a few - include a passel of names even an Internet neophyte would recognize: Adobe Systems, Apple, Canon USA, Dell, Eastman Kodak, Fuji Film, Fujitsu Computer Products of America, Gateway, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, JASC Software (the makers of PaintShop Pro), JVC Americas, Macromedia, Matsushita of America, Panasonic, Toshiba, and Xerox. There are 31 total defendants in the action, which was filed last week in a Texas federal court.
"Over the last two years, Forgent's intellectual property business has generated approximately $90 million from licensing the (.jpg patent) to 30 different companies in Asia, Europe and the United States," said Forgent Networks, the owners of Compression Labs, in a comment that should sound familiar enough to those following the battle between Acacia Research Corp. and a group of adult Internet companies challenging its Digital Media Transmission streaming media patent group. "Forgent has sought to reach agreements on numerous occasions with all these companies, but as of today, none of the defendants have chosen to license."
Forgent chief executive Richard Snyder said announcing the litigation that the .jpg patent - U.S. patent number 4,698,672, known also as just the 672 - is a valid patent. "Forgent is committed to developing all of its assets and technologies to maximize shareholder value," Snyder said. "We believe we will prevail in this litigation as the '672 Patent is valid, enforceable and infringed. It's unfortunate that despite the many opportunities these companies have had to license the patent, they have all declined to participate, leaving us no alternative but to litigate."
Forgent said the 672 patent's "fields of use include any digital still image device used to compress, store, manipulate, print or transmit digital still images such as digital cameras," and even extends beyond digital cameras to cover personal digital assistants (PDAs), cell phones, printers, scanners, and "other devices" which can be used to "compress, store, manipulate, print, or transmit digital still images."
And Forgent/Compression Labs claims the exclusive right to use, license, and enforce all claims under the patent in all uses of digital still image compression, the company said.
Acacia Research Corp. executive vice president Robert Berman did not return a query for comment on the .jpg litigation before this story went to press. But Acacia's main DMT patent challenger, New Destiny/Homegrown Video chief Spike Goldberg, said patent battles like his own with Acacia and the coming Compression Labs battle were not going to go away anytime soon.
"We all have patent problems," Goldberg told AVNOnline.com. "If these guys did invent the jpeg and everybody stole it from them, I support them wholeheartedly. But if they just try to buy it and use legal loopholes, it's a shame."
The Forgent/Compression Labs defendants could have one hope if the Federal Trade Commission, which is said to be wondering whether Compression acted improperly during the standard-setting process for .jpeg/.jpg in the 1980s-early 1990s, decides the company acted improperly enough that the FTC would ask the Patent & Trademark Office to negate the patent.
"The FTC is a great organization," Goldberg said. "They do an awful lot to stop a lot of people and companies from running roughshod over people. We can always hope. This is a fight that has universal proportionality. It'll affect every one of us one way or the others."
Neither Adobe Systems nor Apple Computer were able to answer queries for comment before this story went to press.
