Sony Fights Back Against ObjectVideo

By: John Honovich, Published on May 08, 2011

Since ObjectVideo filed suit against Bosch, Samsung and Sony in April 2011, speculation has been rife over whether these large companies would pay up to avoid the nuisance or use their large scale to contest.

For Sony, at least, it has become clear that they will fight back against the allegations of patent infringement. In this note, we examine how and why Sony contends the patents are invalid.

Our analysis indicates that Sony's position is grounded in 2 fundamental aspects of US patent law: (1) "Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent" and (2) "Duty to disclose information material to patentability." Let's start by examining what these mean:

  • Novelty and loss of right to patent is defined in 35 U.S.C. 102. Essentially, if an invention has been made known to the public for more than 1 year prior to a patent application filing, a person shall not be entitled to a patent.
  • Duty to disclose information (37 CFR 1.56 [link no longer available]), more commonly known as inequitable conduct, requires an applicant to "disclose to the [Patent] Office all information known to that individual to be material to patentability." If the applicant does not, even if the patent is otherwise valid, the courts can decide not to enforce the patent.

Here's essentially what Sony is claiming: A) ObjectVideo disclosed the 'art' in question (tripwires, calibration, etc.) more than a year prior to filing their first patent application cited in the suit and B) ObjectVideo willfully failed to disclose information showing this when they filed the patent.

The case is made in Sony's 64 page court filing - "Sony Electronic's Answers and Counterclaims" (25MB PDF). Of those 64 pages, the majority is boilerplate. The most interesting and relevant section is pages 48 - 57. The following are key excerpts that will help you understand Sony's claims:

  • Sony claims, "ObjectVideo developed, offered to sell, or sold its Automated Video Surveillance (AVS) product more than one year prior to the filing of US Patent Application No. 10/704,645" in 2003. The AVS product and publicly available documents 'taught' some of the claimed elements in the patents and were, therefore, prior art.
  • Sony claims that the applicants knew of the AVS product but failed to disclose 'with deceptive intent' to avoid prejudicing the pending patent applications.
  • Sony cites a "Critical Assets' IEEE White paper from December 2002 (see copy) that was not disclosed in the applications.

While we are not attornies and offer no legal opinions, one important question remains for us. The application for the first of ObjectVideo patents listed in this lawsuit was filed October 9, 2001 (the '945' patent). Even if the claims against the other applications (filed in 2003 or later) are deemed valid, could the original patent still be enforced?

For another defense agains the OV patents, see our report on a claim that late 1990 patent applications in Japan show prior art that should invalidate OV's patents.

5 reports cite this report:

Samsung Responds to OV's Lawsuit on Jul 17, 2011
Samsung has filed a legal response to ObjectVideo's lawsuit, becoming the...
Can ObjectVideo Block Bosch, Samsung and Sony Cameras from the US? on Jun 29, 2011
ObjectVideo has expanded its patent litigation campaign to the US...
Bosch Responds to ObjectVideo Lawsuit on Jun 21, 2011
The ObjectVideo lawsuit continues to make its way through the legal process....
ObjectVideo Responds to Sony's Counterclaim on Jun 21, 2011
In May 2011, Sony filed a counterclaim against ObjectVideo's April 2011...
2011 Mid Year Video Surveillance Review on Jun 11, 2011
The first half of 2011 featured a number of important shifts within the video...
Comments : Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

JCI Sues Genetec For Patent Infringement on Jul 13, 2020
Surprisingly, security giant JCI has sued their partner, security software...
Axis / Avigilon Patent Litigation Ends With 3 Invalidated Patents on Sep 09, 2020
The multi-year, multi-district patent litigation between Canon and Axis...
Vape Detection Legal Battle: Soter Sues IPVideo Corp on Jul 22, 2020
The crosstown vape detection rivals are now in a legal battle. While IPVideo...
X.Labs Sues FLIR on Sep 16, 2020
X.Labs, the maker of Feevr, has sued FLIR, the publicly traded thermal...
Hikvision Sues Over Brazilian Airport Loss on Sep 24, 2020
Hikvision was excluded from a Brazilian airport project because it is owned...
Genetec CEO Declares "We Don't Negotiate Payment With Patent Trolls" on Aug 11, 2020
Are patent trolls like terrorists? Genetec's CEO is coming out strongly...
Trade Groups Request NDAA Blacklist Delay Citing Coronavirus on Apr 06, 2020
Two trade groups representing government contractors have asked Congress to...
Panasonic i-PRO Hid Huawei, Does Damage Control on Aug 21, 2020
Panasonic i-PRO hid their usage of Huawei from the public, continues to...
UK Court Rules Police Facial Recognition Needs Reform on Sep 01, 2020
A UK court has ruled that the South Wales Police use of facial recognition is...
ZKTeco SpeedFace+ Are Medical Devices, Per FDA Definition, Contrary Claims Are False on Jun 12, 2020
ZKTeco SpeedFace+ series products are medical devices as defined by the US...
SIA Coaches Sellers on NDAA 889B Blacklist Workarounds on Aug 05, 2020
Last month SIA demanded that NDAA 899B "must be delayed". Now that they have...
Hikvision Admits Sanctions Harming Its Financial Performance on Mar 27, 2020
While Hikvision initially downplayed being sanctioned for human rights...
Wrong Dahua Australia Medical Device Approved on Jul 20, 2020
Dahua's body temperature system is now in Australia's medical device...
Amazon, Microsoft and IBM Abandoning Face Recognition Is An "Irresponsible PR Stunt" Says AnyVision on Jul 17, 2020
In the wake of national protests against US police abuses, big tech firms...
ADT: 'Fever' Cameras Are Medical Devices on Jun 15, 2020
While many manufacturers are avoiding admitting their 'fever' cameras are...

Recent Reports

Hikvision Sues Over Brazilian Airport Loss on Sep 24, 2020
Hikvision was excluded from a Brazilian airport project because it is owned...
China General Chamber of Commerce Calls Out US Politics on Sep 24, 2020
While US-China relations at an all-time low, optimism about relations...
Verkada Disruptive Embedded Live Help on Sep 24, 2020
Call up your integrator? Have someone come by the next day? Verkada is...
IP Networking Course Fall 2020 - Last Chance - Register Now on Sep 23, 2020
Today is the last chance to register for the only IP networking course...
Drain Wire For Access Control Reader Tutorial on Sep 23, 2020
An easy-to-miss cabling specification plays a key role in access control, yet...
IPVM Camera Calculator User Manual / Guide on Sep 23, 2020
Learn how to use the IPVM Camera Calculator (updated for Version 3.1). The...
Installation Course Fall 2020 - Save $50 - Last Chance on Sep 22, 2020
Today is your last chance to save $50 on registration for the Fall 2020 Video...
SimpliSafe Business Security Launched Examined on Sep 22, 2020
SimpliSafe has launched "SimpliSafe Business Security" that the company...
FLIR CEO: Many New Fever Entrants "Making Claims That The Science Just Won't Support" on Sep 22, 2020
FLIR's CEO joins a growing number calling out risks with fever / screening...
China Bems Temperature Measurement Terminal Tested on Sep 22, 2020
Guangzhou Bems (brand Benshi) is the manufacturer behind temperature...
Axis Exports To China Police Criticized By Amnesty International on Sep 21, 2020
Axis Communications and other EU surveillance providers are under fire from...
Milestone XProtect on AWS Tested on Sep 21, 2020
Milestone finally launched multiple cloud solutions in 2020, taking a...
Mobile Access Control Usage Statistics 2020 on Sep 21, 2020
Most smartphones can be used as access control credentials, but how...
Axis Compares Fever Camera Sellers to 9/11 on Sep 18, 2020
Axis Communications, the West's largest surveillance camera manufacturer, has...