It appears that there is a little more to the lawsuit that was filed against Digeo by Gemstar a few days ago. I said in the last article that Gemstar and Digeo had fallen out over a licensing deal. This fall out actually ended up with Digeo filing an antitrust lawsuit against Gemstar.
The Seattle Times describes the licensing disagreement:
"The rivalry between Digeo and Gemstar surfaced Thursday in federal court in Seattle, where Digeo filed a lawsuit claiming that Gemstar violated federal and state antitrust laws. Digeo said that it asked to license a subset of the 249 patents in Gemstar's IPG portfolio, but that Gemstar insisted Digeo license the entire portfolio. If Digeo didn't sign that licensing agreement, the suit said, it would be sued by Gemstar for patent infringement. Digeo is seeking damages in court and an order that stops Gemstar's licensing practices."
It seems in retaliation to the antitrust lawsuit, Gemstar has filed its own lawsuit over patent infringement against Digeo.
Gemstar has a reputation of being very aggressive when it comes to dealing with potential competition. Several years ago it had a row with TiVo over a similar issue which resulted in an eventual partnership between Gemstar and TiVo.
Dave Zatz has suggested that Gemstar may be involved in some anticompetitive practices which leads back to Comcast. Comcast was an equity investor/partner in both TiVo and Gemstar.
It seems that Digeo don't want to be bullied into a similar agreement that TiVo has with Gemstar. I received an email from Gerry Van Zandt at Digeo yesterday containing Digeo's alledged response to the lawsuit.
"According to press reports on Friday, Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against Digeo, Inc. Digeo has not seen a copy of the complaint and, therefore, cannot comment on it.
Gemstar's lawsuit is an apparent reaction to the federal antitrust lawsuit that Digeo filed against Gemstar in Seattle, Washington on September 28. Digeo's lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and damages caused by Gemstar's anticompetitive business and licensing practices and by Gemstar's ongoing monopolization and attempted monopolization of relevant markets through exclusionary and unlawful acts. Digeo contends that Gemstar's anticompetitive practices, including its demands that Digeo accede to unlawful licensing terms, have caused injury to competition, consumers and innovation related to interactive program guides.
Digeo disagrees with a reported statement by a Gemstar executive claiming that Gemstar's lawsuit was the result of Digeo's alleged refusal to negotiate. It was Gemstar that demanded anticompetitive licensing terms and refused to provide meaningful options to Digeo. Gemstar's licensing demands to Digeo only reinforce the legitimacy of Digeo's allegations in its federal antitrust lawsuit against Gemstar."
1. If Digeo is successful this could be a boon to IPG makers everywhere. I mean really...how do you patent a grid guide?
Posted at 1:05PM on Oct 20th 2006 by cableric