the litigation ledger - Brief Article

Emedia Professional, August, 1999 by Marla Misek

Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) v. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc.

The RIAA suffered a major setback in its efforts to stifle sales of Diamond Multimedia's Rio MP300 MP3 player--which downloads and stores music posted to the Internet--when a federal appeals court ruled June 15 that the device does not violate federal anti-piracy laws. The panel of three judges in San Francisco's 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously agreed the Rio does not qualify as a "digital audio recording device" and is, therefore, not subject to the restrictions of the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act. "The Rio's operation is entirely consistent with the act's main purpose--the facilitation of personal use," wrote Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, suggesting that the Rio facilitates noncommercial, private use rather than widespread public piracy, as the RIAA has accused.

Rimage Corporation v. Cedar Technologies, Inc.

A trade secrets lawsuit filed in January 1998 by Rimage Corporation against Cedar Technologies in a Minnesota district court was settled out of court in early June; a hearing was scheduled for June 30. The suit alleged that a former Rimage employee--subsequently employed by Cedar--had violated a noncompete agreement and passed along trade secrets that were allegedly used subsequently in the development of Cedar's CD Desktop Publisher product. The specific terms of the settlement are bound by a confidentiality agreement.

ATI Technologies v. Real 3D, Inc.

ATI Technologies, Inc. filed a countersuit against Real 3D, Inc. in early June in response to Real 3D's suit alleging that ATI's RAGE graphics product line infringes two Real 3D patents. At the center of the two-way litigation are Real 3D's patents for "a method for modulating color for effecting color cell texture" and for an "advanced video object generator." Prior to ATI's filing, Real 3D had alleged that ATI's RAGE products infringe on those patents' claims. In turn, ATI is alleging in its suit that sales of its products "may be adversely affected by the continuing threat" of Real 3D and is seeking judicial confirmation that its products do not infringe on the claims of the Real 3D patents and that the patent claims be declared invalid.

Intergraph Corporation v. Intel Corporation

A U.S. District Court judge has rejected Intel Corporation's contention that it had a right to use Intergraph Corporation's Clipper chip technology in its Pentium family of microprocessors. Intergraph filed suit against Intel in November 1997, alleging patent infringement, illegal coercive behavior, and antitrust violations. The hearing begins February 14, 2000. Intel maintains that it had the rights to the Clipper patents through a 1976 cross-licensing agreement with National Semiconductor Corporation. In 1987, though, both National and Intergraph acquired portions of Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, the original developer of the Clipper chip. Intergraph, therefore, contends that Intel has been using the Clipper chip without licensing the technology through Intergraph.