Rovi Guides infringement case against Bell, Ericsson companies will move ahead

A Federal Court judge has dismissed an attempt by BCE Inc. and Ericsson AB to have a patent infringement case against them thrown out. In a decision released last Thursday, the court upheld a March 2022 decision by Case Management Judge Kevin Aalto to dismiss Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson, Ericsson Canada, MK Systems USA, and MK Mediatech Canada – collectively Mediakind’s – request to strike the companies as defendants in a case involving Rovi Guides Inc. Rovi alleges that Bell, its operations, and the Mediakind entities infringed on several of its patents, including the ability to pause and rewind live TV, record live TV, maintain a directory of recorded programs and the ability to watch and record different programs simultaneously. At the time, the Mediakind defendants submitted that Rovi’s statement of claim contained no material facts that allegedly amounted to patent infringement, arguing that they do not provide television services in Canada and therefore cannot infringe on its technology. Rovi in turn argued that in 2018 Bell announced it would offer “enhanced, personalized and converged multiscreen TV experience” in relationship with some of the Mediakind entities. Rovi and the court have no knowledge of the provisions of the agreement between Bell and the Mediakind entities because it has not been disclosed. Bell and Mediakind defendants argued that Rovi would use the discovery process as a “fishing expedition” to determine if other parts of the patent have been infringed. However, Rovi argued “Mediakind’s use, manufacturing, distributing, offering for sale, selling, supplying and otherwise making available Mediaroom and Mediafirst to Bell as part of its Fibe TV service” was enough evidence to establish a link between Mediakind and Bell in the suit. The case management judge, and subsequently the federal court justice both agreed with Rovi’s argument. Justice Henry Brown wrote in Thursday’s decision that “a motion to strike is a serious remedy – often described as a ‘draconian measure’ – that should only be taken in the ‘clearest and most obvious cases.’” Brown wrote that Bell and Mediakind failed to establish that the case management judge made a palpable and overriding error in dismissing the motion for lack of material facts, or in dismissing its request to remove Mediakind as defendants. The defendants must pay Rovi a lump sum cost award of $3,500 for the appeal. The infringement case against Bell and Mediakind is similar to the one Rovi brought forward against Quebecor Inc.’s Videotron. Last week the federal court determined that the Quebec-based company did not infringe on Rovi’s interactive television program guide patents because the technology is part of the common knowledge of a skilled person. – Reporting by Jenna Cocullo at jcocullo@thewirereport.ca and editing by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca

Rovi Guides infringement case against Bell, Ericsson companies will move ahead

Broadcast | July 5, 2022

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Rovi Guides infringement case against Bell, Ericsson companies will move ahead

Broadcast | July 5, 2022

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Telecom industry players look to Senate for greater copper theft prevention

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us