Lawsuit against 12 sex cam operators for patent infringement

Picture: © by magbiz
A long-time insider of the American adult industry, Brandon Shalton, commented the lawsuit of Joao against the sex cam operators, and said that it had the touch of a patent abuse.

The American adult industry is well versed with court proceedings. This time it however is not about a planned prohibition of pornography or the introduction of the so called pseudo minority, or an attack by morally indignant citizens. This time 12 sex cam operators are accused for alleged patent infringement. Included are well-known names like Playboy Enterprises, Penthouse Media Group, LFP Internet Group, FriendFinder’s Steamray Inc., Vivid Entertainment, Playboy’s ClubJenna unit, Anabolic Video Productions, Evil Angel Productions, New Destiny Internet Group, Shane Enterprises and Private Media Group’s GameLink.

According to the statement of claim, these operators infringe patent no. 7,277,010. This patent includes the production, the operation as well as the sale of surveillance equipment, video communication equipment and services of this field. The statement of claim does not actually answer the question, in which way the patent would be infringed. The patent belongs to the patent attorney Raymond Anthony Joao from New York, who demands compensation payments, the payment of attorney and court costs with this lawsuit, as well as a permanent decision of the court against further patent infringements on the part of the accused parties. Joao is in possession of several patents, allegedly over 90. He recently also filed a lawsuit against various banks and communication companies, among them AT&T Inc., American Express Co. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. He blames the infringement of a patent, which covers devices and methods for secure credit card transactions.

A long-time insider of the American adult industry, Brandon Shalton, commented the lawsuit of Joao against the sex cam operators, and said that it had the touch of a patent abuse. If you read the patent, you get the impression that it concentrates on surveillance techniques. It would be a long lump if you would think it would also refer to web cams. The patent would not mention financial aspects for the transmission (like e.g. costs per minute).

Source: xbiz.com