OpenTV accuses Netflix of patent infringement
A pioneer in the interactive television industry, OpenTV, is tired of Netflix focusing its energies on brokering deals to get Disney movies on its site, and not negotiating with OpenTV for patent licenses.
December 20, 2012 at 05:59 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A pioneer in the interactive television industry, OpenTV, is tired of Netflix focusing its energies on brokering deals to get Disney movies on its site, and not negotiating with OpenTV for patent licenses. So OpenTV's owner, Swiss company Kudelski SA, decided to grab Netflix's attention with a lawsuit.
Kudelski claims that Netflix is infringing on seven of its U.S. patents covering over-the-top TV technology including video playback and that Netflix staple: recommendations based on viewing activity. The lawsuit alleges that Kudelski tried to talk to Netflix about licensing the patents for a year, but Netflix did not take it up on the offer.
“Companies like Netflix have, in essence, stood on the shoulders of giants, largely focusing their R&D efforts on aggregating these previously patented technologies and using them to provide a rich customer experience,” the lawsuit reads.
Read more at Reuters.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of Netflix, see below:
David Hyman carved his own path to the general counsel chair at Netflix
Netflix Nixes Contest Over Privacy Concerns
Judge Allows Blockbuster Countersuit Against Netflix to Proceed
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
What to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
4 minute read
Turning Over Legal Tedium to AI Requires Lots of Unglamorous Work on Front End
6 minute read
The Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
Tesla, Musk Appeal Chancery Compensation Case to Delaware Supreme Court
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 16-48. It’s Comp Time Again: How To Crush Your Comp Memo
- 2'Religious Discrimination'?: 4th Circuit Revives Challenge to Employer Vaccine Mandate
- 3Fight Over Amicus-Funding Disclosure Surfaces in Google Play Appeal
- 4The Power of Student Prior Knowledge in Legal Education
- 5Chicago Cubs' IP Claim to Continue Against Wrigley View Rooftop, Judge Rules
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
