Who ** ****** ***
****** *** ** * ******* ********* corporation ************ ** **** ** **** in *******. ******* ****** ** ****** ********** behind ************. ******** ** * ******* LLC ** *** **** ** **** their *********** (****, *******, ******* ****, etc.) ********** **** *** ********* ** State, *** **** **** * ********** agent—a ******* ***** *** ** ** to ***** *** ************ **** *** state *** ***** ** ***** *** other ************** ******* *** *** ********** and *** **** ** *** *****.
****** *** **** *** **** * website *** *** ***** ****** ****** information *** ******* ***********.
********, ***** ** ******* *********** ***** ****** *** ** *** ********** ***** at *** ******* ********* ** *****. **********, ******* **** *** *** need ** **** *** ********** *********** information **** ****** **** ******* ***** LLC. * **** ****** ** *** *** ***** **** ********* *** *** **** to **** ***** **** *********** ** file **** ***** *********** *****, ** explained ** *** **** **** ******* below:

*******, **** ** ** *** ** the *** ****. *** ********** *********** information ** **** **** *** ********** agent **** *** **** ** ** shared **** ****** ****.
**** ********* **** ********** ********* ** ****************** ****** ***., *** ********** ***** **** ******* all ** ****** ***'* ********. *** state ** ******* **** ** **** did *** **** **** *********** *** would **** ** ***** **** *********** if **** ****** ** ***** ****** Cam. ********** ****** **** ** **** we ***** ******* *** *********** *** ********* letter, *** **** **** **** *** required ** ******* ** *** ***.
Attorneys *** ****** *** ******* *******
**** ***** ******* ***** *** ***** and ***** ** ***** *****-***** *** Brandt *** ****, *** ******* ******** for *** ********* ** *** *** cases **** ****** **. *******, ******** for ***** **** *** **** ********.
Update: ******* ** ******* ******* ** ************ **** ****** ***
**** ***** **** ************ ******** *** company **** **** *** **** ******* involved ** *** ********** ******* ******, Hikvision, ***, *******, *********, *** ***** Insight. ************ ******** ****** *** ******* or ************ **** ********* ******* ** selling **** *** *******:
****** *** ******* ******* ** * regular **** ** *** ******** *** in **** ** **** * ****** of ******* ** ****** *** ***. Secure *** ** ** *********** *******, it ** *** * ********** ** Intellectual ********, *** ** ** *** have *** ********* ** ******* **** what *** ****** ** **** *** patents **** *******.
Acquired **** *******
****** *** *********** ******* ************* **** ********* *** ******* ****** lawsuit ******** ** **** ******** ** suing ***** ** ***'* *** *******. Below ** * **** ** ******* Secure *** *** ********, *** *** original ***** ***, *** **** *** original ******** **** **.
- ***********: ******** ******** ********** ********** ***. Original ******** **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** ******* ***. ******** Priority **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** **** *********** ********** *. Priority **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** **** *********** ********** *. *** Priority **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** ****** *. ***á*. ******** **** 1998-05-18
- ***************: ******** ******** ******* ***. ******** **** ****-**-**
- ***************: ******** ********* ****** *****, **** Raposo, ***** *******, ******* ********, ***** Hoomani, ****** *********. ******** **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** ******* ************ ***. ******** **** 1998-07-23
- ***********: ******** ******** *** **** ******* ***. ******** date ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** *** **** ******* ***. Priority **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** *** **** ******* LLC. Priority **** ****-**-**
- ***********: ******** ******** ******** ******** ***. ******** **** 1998-07-23
- ***********: ******** ******** *** **** ******* ***. ******** date ****-**-**
**** ***** ** ******* ******** *** an ******* ** ******* **** ********* of ****** **** **** ******* ** a ****** ***** ******* * ****** set ** *********.
What ******* *** ********* ***** *********
***** ***** ********** ****** ** *** ***** case ******* **** ****** *** *** brought ******* ****** ********-******* *********, **** ** ***** **** **** closed/settled/reassigned:

*** ********** **** ***** ******* ***** and ******* ** **** ** * coordinated ******. **** ****** ** ***** at * ****-***** ******** ********* *** details *** ******** *****. ***** ********* we ****** ** *** ***********: ~* pages ****, **** ********* *** ***********. For ***** *********, *** ****** ************ ***** relies ** *********** ** ***********. **** **** ***** ** **** the ********* *****'* **** ** **** actually ********* **** *** ****** ** question:

*********, *** *** ********** ********* ********* **** to ** ** ******* ** *** patented ********* ****** *** ****** *** being *********.
********* ********* ****** ****** ******* ***. (*********)**** ********* ********** ** **** ** Secure ***'* *******. **** ** ***** ********** were *********** ********* ** ****** ***,******* ** */**/** ******* ********************* ** */**/**, **** *********. "**** *********" ***** **** ****** Cam ** ****** ** *** ***** to **** **** **** ********* *****. Without ********* ***** **** ******* *** right ** **** *** ********* *****, perhaps ** ******* ************. *******, "**** prejudice" ***** *** ********* *** *** a ********* ******* **********. *** **** patents ******* *** ********* **** ******* of ********** *** ****** *****:
*** **** ******* ******** ******* ********* that ***** *** **** ******, * "method ** ************* ************ ****** ** a ******* ******."
** ****, *** ******** *** *** four ******* ** ******* *** ****:

******, ********* [**** ** ****** *********], *** [link ** ****** *********], *** ***** ******* (*********)*** ********* ********** ** *** *** ******. ****** ****** ** * ****** *** ******** ******* storage ** *****:

***** ****** *** ***** ******* *** it ** ***** ******* ******* ** not *** ********** **** **** ** their ************ ********* *** ******** ** fight ** ******* ****, **** ******* and *********, **** ******.
What ******** *** *******
*** ******* ********* ***** **** ** ** *** *******'* access ******* ******* **** *** ********:

****** *** **** ***** * ********* ****** *********** ****** *** ** *** camera:

****** ***** ***** ********** *** ******** *******:

*** ********* ********* [**** ** ****** available] listed *********'* **** *** ********:

***'* [**** ** ****** *********] ****** ******* VMS *** ****** ** ***** *********:

***** ******* (*********) ***** *** *-*** ****** ** *** accused ****:

Likely ********
***** **** * ****** ** ********** have **** *********** ********* **** *********, it ** ****** **** *** ******* parties ******* ******* ** ***** **** Secure ***, ** ** *********** **** ********** ** *********** *********:

***** **** ******, *********, *** *** Video ******* (*********) **** ******** ********* resources **** ***** ** ****, **** may *** ****** ** *****, ******* players **** ****.
Potential ******** *** **********
** *** ****** *** ******* ** winning *********** *** ********, **** *** encourage **** ** ******** *** ****** their ********.
*** *********** ******* ** ****** *** knowing *** "****** ***" **. *** company ***** ** * ****** ****** or ****** ** * ****-***********. *** this ***** *** ***** ** * headache *** *************.
Comments (24)
Sean Nelson
10/11/18 03:42pm
This is terrible. I cant believe this goes on in our country.
Create New Topic
David Watkins
10/11/18 08:19pm
This reminds me of the Katz patent years ago (Ronald Katz - financial transactions via telco lines) where this guy had a vision of being able to transmit financial transactions (as early as back in the 60s) and laid a series of patents into the 80s to cover that idea. Later, when this came to be widely accepted practice across DSL, ISDNs and such, Katz created a company of attorneys whose sole purpose was to sue banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions, large and small. They made untold Billion$ off this with out of court settlements. I worked with a couple of the smaller companies and saw what they were being squeezed for quarterly - unbelievable. It will be interesting to see how these companies respond to the suits.
Create New Topic
Dan Gelinas
We'd like to invite anyone who may have information on the lawsuits Secure Cam has filed/settled to send us a message or comment here. We're actively trying to find out who they are and welcome any input from our readers. Email me at dan@ipvm.com or use the contact form anonymously.
Create New Topic
Dan Gelinas
Here is what we have learned so far while tracing the lineage of assignees:
Intellectual Ventures, LLC was the entity that transferred ownership of the 5 patents we looked at that were involved in litigation against Hanwha, Hikvision, JCI, Panasonic, Facekey and GeoVision. The patent numbers are listed below and are linked to the assignment lineage for each:
6698021
8350928
8531555
8836819
9363408
The man behind Intellectual Ventures is Dr. Nathan Myhrvold, formerly Chief Strategist and Chief Technology Officer for Microsoft.
All 5 patents were transferred on July 26, 2017
Paperwork for all 5 patent transfers to Secure Cam was filed by IP Lawyer Obi Iloputaife.
We will call Intellectual Ventures as well as Obi Iloputaife and will follow up with additional information when available.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #5
https://www.registeredagentsinc.com/
same address as securecam
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #6
This guy Nathan Myhrvold must be incredibly wealthy .... IV is the same outfit that Nest Labs had to partner with to fight off Honeywell's repeated attempts to take them down on various patent infringement claims.
Then, Google buys Nest Labs .... wow
I can see how innovation and invention is getting more and more difficult with anything that takes off getting pummeled with patent troll claims.
Create New Topic
Dan Gelinas
UPDATE:
Sellers of Patents Comment on Relationship with Secure Cam
IPVM spoke with Intellectual Ventures the company that sold the five patents involved in the litigation against Hanwha, Hikvision, JCI, Facekey, GeoVision, and Video Insight. Intellectual Ventures denied any control or relationship with SecureCam outside of selling them the patents:
Create New Topic
John Honovich
Update: Secure Cam has sued more companies, most notably Genetec and Mobotix, and stranger, Babysense:
Evidently, Babysense sells baby monitors but it's an odd choice to include in these lawsuits.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #7
Has anybody thought yet to patent the business process for patent trolling? Whoever did that could rule the (Western) world. Imagine the patent examiner reading the patent application:
To use loopholes and short sighted regulations of the patent office to legally extort money from other companies through legal threats sent from shell companies, capitalizing on the target companies wish to minimize expenses and losses in a patent suit by aiming for a settlement.
Sounds feasible and detailed enough to me to a legitimate patent based on other patents the office has approved.
Create New Topic