• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Daily Blog, Featured, Patents

New Music Service Spotify Gets Hit with Patent Infringement Claim

Submitted by Alexandra Mackey on August 25, 2011 – 8:28 AM386210 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F08%2F25%2Fnew-music-service-spotify-gets-hit-with-patent-infringement-claim%2FNew+Music+Service+Spotify+Gets+Hit+with+Patent+Infringement+Claim+2011-08-25+12%3A28%3A31Alexandra+Mackeyhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D3862

Chances are you’ve heard something about Spotify, the newest music streaming service to hit the United States.  Less than a month ago the Swedish-based company debuted its service stateside.  However, you may not have heard that they are already getting sued for patent infringement.

If you haven’t heard of Spotify already, you can see what it is all about in this YouTube video.  There are few things I like more than having things explained to me through animation, so enjoy.  Spotify is a music streaming service that allows users to access over 15 million tracks for free.  Users can skip the intermittent advertisements and upgrade to an “Unlimited” package for $4.99 a month or take it one step further and access the service in an offline mode through the “Premium” package for $9.99 a month.  The company creates revenue through its subscriber programs, advertisements, and downloads, but Spotify pays royalties to the song’s rights holders each time a track is played.  Spotify was created in Sweden in 2008, and on July 14 Spotify announced that it was coming to the US.  Currently, Americans can access the service by invite only via the company’s website.

On July 27, PacketVideo, a company that produces software for wireless media, filed a patent infringement claim in US District Court for the Southern District of California.  PacketVideo claims that Spotify is using its patented technology to allow music to be accessed through Spotify’s cloud-based service.  PacketVideo’s general counsel said that the company is ready for a fight and will “take any necessary action needed to protect its intellectual property and prevent the misuse of its patents.”

PacketVideo’s patent in question, 5,636,276, is for a “device for the distribution of music information in digital form.”  PacketVideo didn’t develop the technology but acquired the patent when it took over SDC, a Swiss firm, back in 2007.  In the claim against Spotify, PacketVideo is requesting a permanent injunction against Spotify’s music streaming service.

The tech world is up in arms about this lawsuit.  Tech blogs, like Techdirt, describe the patent to be nothing more than a generic idea of streaming music.  Others describe it as another example of a US company stifling innovation and silencing competition. Many believe the lawsuit is a testament to just how harmful the US patent system has become in recent years.

Personally, I think Spotify is the greatest thing those Swedes have gifted us with since Alexander Skarsgard.  Spotify is quickly shaping up to be iTunes biggest competitor, though iTunes is a product that doesn’t regularly see much rivalry.  Spotify is a ground-breaking company that has created a stellar service.  Companies like Spotify offer better experiences for their users and could potentially lead to the creation of more jobs in the US.  It would be a shame to see them go because of an overly broad patent claim.

My advice: If you haven’t tried Spotify yet, request an invite through their website before it’s too late.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Alexandra Mackey

Alexandra Mackey is a 3L at WCL with an interest in Intellectual Property and Corporate Law. She is a Senior Blogger for the IP Brief and Managing Editor of the Business Law Review. Alexandra graduated from Pepperdine University with a B.A. in Integrated Marketing Communications. Prior to WCL, Alexandra lived in New York where she worked in the fashion industry.

Alexandra Mackey has written 20 posts for the IPB.

386210 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F08%2F25%2Fnew-music-service-spotify-gets-hit-with-patent-infringement-claim%2FNew+Music+Service+Spotify+Gets+Hit+with+Patent+Infringement+Claim+2011-08-25+12%3A28%3A31Alexandra+Mackeyhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D3862 »

  • The IP Brief (@IPBrief) (@IPBrief) (@IPBrief) (@IPBrief) (@IPBrief) says:
    August 25, 2011 at 9:05 AM

    [IPB] New Music Service Spotify Gets Hit with Patent Infringement Claim – http://t.co/av5bx1P by Alexandra Mackey

    Reply to this comment »
  • Fernando Torres MSc (@FTorresMSc) (@FTorresMSc) says:
    August 25, 2011 at 10:08 AM

    New Music Service Spotify Gets Hit with Patent Infringement Claim: California- based software company … http://t.co/1N7jqYJ #IP

    Reply to this comment »
  • Spotify This, Pandora That: Cloud-based music options to chose « lynnewatanabe says:
    August 25, 2011 at 11:44 PM

    [...] of music distribution is riddled with legal wranglings; Just recently Spotify was hit by a patent infringement claim. There’s more legalities to come as we decide who owns content (music/ books) when on the [...]

    Reply to this comment »
  • IPpro (@IPpro) (@IPpro) says:
    August 26, 2011 at 12:23 AM

    New Music Service Spotify Gets Hit with Patent Infringement Claim http://t.co/nF7S8Pl via @AddToAny

    Reply to this comment »
  • patent litigation says:
    August 29, 2011 at 4:57 PM

    It is annoying that it has become increasingly common for patent trolls and other patent enforcers to get away with filing such "bare-bones" complaints, as PacketVideo has apparently done in this case. Spotify should probably file immediately for reexamination of PacketVideo's patent.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Patent Attorney (@PatentAtty) says:
    August 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

    New Music Service @Spotify Gets Hit with #Patent Infringement Claim http://ow.ly/6h0C0

    Reply to this comment »
  • Satch says:
    August 30, 2011 at 6:55 PM

    Uh….nice Dennis Milleresque Skarsgard reference!

    Reply to this comment »
  • Colt Agar says:
    January 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM

    I agree with your evaluation of Spotify Alexandra! I love the service and actually did a review of their "premium" service plan on my blog I'll link below. Copyright issues aren't the only thing Spotify has dealt with though. It seems artists who's labels licensed their music to be played on Spotify are making a very very small amount of money per play and are fed up with it! Hope nothing happens to my beloved music provider!

    You can check it out right here.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Colt Agar says:
    January 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM

    I agree with your evaluation of Spotify Alexandra! I love the service and actually did a review of their "premium" service plan on my blog I'll link below. Copyright issues aren't the only thing Spotify has dealt with though. It seems artists who's labels licensed their music to be played on Spotify are making a very very small amount of money per play and are fed up with it! Hope nothing happens to my beloved music provider!

    You can check it out right here.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Colt Agar says:
    January 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM

    I agree with your evaluation of Spotify Alexandra! I love the service and actually did a review of their "premium" service plan on my blog I'll link below. Copyright issues aren't the only thing Spotify has dealt with though. It seems artists who's labels licensed their music to be played on Spotify are making a very very small amount of money per play and are fed up with it! Hope nothing happens to my beloved music provider!

    You can check it out right here.

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Shortly after the oral arguments between Monsanto and Bowman, WCL hosted both parties for a post argument discussion. Recently the Supreme Court ruled on the case, requiring annual purchases of Monsanto’s soybeans.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Please, Steal My IP! Piracy as a Valuable Marketing Strategy UPDATE: Fox News Continues Copyright Infringement Suit Against Former Democratic Senate Candidate Robin Carnahan Gaymers Unite: Reddit “Gaymer” Subgroup Files Petition to Cancel the Trademark “Gaymer” Yogi Shot by Boo-Boo, Warner Brothers Won’t Sue Update: Charlie Sheen Files Applications to Trademark Two More Catch Phrases “Where There Is A Sea There Are Pirates.”  The Pirate Bay Threatens To Live Up To Its Name Instyler vs. Amazon: How Much Should a Service Provider Police its Users Activities? Microsoft Claims Victory Against Motorola Mobility’s German Lawsuit by Using a Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order Issued by a U.S. Judge in a Contract Dispute Settling for Less? An Analysis of the Possibility of Positive Legal Precedent on the Internet if the Google Book Search Litigation Had Not Reached a Settlement Time (70 Years) Is Money New gTLDs, New Problems
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business
  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License