Jump to content

Cooperative Entertainment v. Ripple Labs


Recommended Posts

Hey guys, 

TLDR: a new lawsuit or complaint for patent infringement has been filed against Ripple (the company). Cooperative Entertainment, Inc. (based out of Raleigh, NC) recently filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs, Inc. on 9/25/2019. The patent in dispute (U.S. Patent No. 9,432,452) was filed in 2013 by Cooperative Entertainment  - https://patents.google.com/patent/US9432452. As of today (10/30), Ripple (the company) has not responded to the complaint. 


Here is a more detailed analysis of the lawsuit or complaint:

1) Cooperative Entertainment, Inc. is a company based out of Raleigh, North Carolina (US). They are the plaintiff in this case. Ripple Labs, Inc. or Ripple (the company) is the defendant. 
2) Cooperative Entertainment is registered for doing business in North Carolina (see photo below). 
3) Cooperative Entertainment appears to have been founded in 2010 by Juan R. Benito - https://www.linkedin.com/in/juanbenito
4) According to the LinkedIn Profile, "Cooperative Entertainment is a boutique software development consultancy specializing in games for both consumer and corporate deployment. Clients include The World Bank, Fidelity Investments, BCBS, Capitol Broadcasting Company, Lockheed Martin, BLDG-25, StandardWorks, The E.W. Scripps Company, US Intelligence Community, and others. From console games to serious games, Cooperative's network of talented developers can advise, design, develop, and deploy games of all kinds and on all platforms."

5) This case was filed in federal court.  
6) The plaintiff is alleging that the defendant's RippleNet is infringing on U.S. Patent No. 9,432,452. 
7) Cooperative Entertainment "prayer for relief" includes for a fair and reasonable royalty, along with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by law. 
8) The complaint gets somewhat technical. Feel free to read the entire complaint here - https://pdfhost.io/v/a8JXXsiCr_show_temppdf.pdf.
9) And here is the docket - https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/30211232/Cooperative_Entertainment,_Inc_v_Ripple_Labs,_Inc


The community will be updated as this case makes its way through the judicial process. Thanks, guys!

@Pablo @Snoopy @zerpdigger @vlad_got_it @jcdenton @Mrsrippley @Sebastian @xrpisking

 

 

Untitled.png

Untitled1.png

Edited by brjXRP17
Added URL link to complaint
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must definitely be missing something here (and I'll happily confess to having zero pertinent legal knowledge in this matter).

BUT, if this patent was filed on Sept 10, 2013 -- at least a year AFTER the XRPL was developed by David Schwartz et.al. doesn't that constitute a clear case of prior art? Good luck convincing a judge that Ripple Labs' use of the already-invented (not to mention open-source and in no way Ripple Labs-owned) XRPL constitutes infringement of something that was patented a year later...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no clue whatsoever about the complexities of patent law but in my professional opinion this is a pile of horse bits.

Reading through this patent I would challenge anyone to equate it with the XRPL (that, as noted above by Archer, existed before this was lodged).

I note that nowhere in the Patent concerned does it mention 'money', 'value', 'finance', 'transfer', 'encrypted', 'secure' or any other vaguely even tangentially related terms that RippleNet focuses on.

It would seem obvious that the authors of this Patent never had any intention whatsoever that it would claim to be even vaguely related to transferring 'value' and seems to be solely and repeatedly focused on transferring media and repeatedly references content distribution, video, games, files and 'data'.

As is tradition by my kind, I sum up the situation in an interpretive gif... to the lions! 

thumbs-down.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, OzAlphaWolf said:

Really looks frivolous to me. Why are they suing Ripple and not the zillion other blockchain companies? Because Ripple is the largest, most visible and most successful is my bet.

I concur with everything you've said. Don't forget one of the most profitable, which makes them a prime target for idiots!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 10/30/2019 at 6:24 PM, ZerpAndFlurp said:

I must definitely be missing something here (and I'll happily confess to having zero pertinent legal knowledge in this matter).

BUT, if this patent was filed on Sept 10, 2013 -- at least a year AFTER the XRPL was developed by David Schwartz et.al. doesn't that constitute a clear case of prior art? Good luck convincing a judge that Ripple Labs' use of the already-invented (not to mention open-source and in no way Ripple Labs-owned) XRPL constitutes infringement of something that was patented a year later...

The application does have a priority date of September 10, 2012. Your argument might still hold water, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.