Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. has filed two patent infringement complaints against Skylum Software USA Inc. and Aspiro, Inc. for patent infringement. The patents at issue cover different technological applications. The suit against Skylum concerns technology designed to correct red eye effects in photo editing software. Specific software mentioned Skylum’s Luminar 4. The suit against Aspiro concerns its Tidal music streaming service.
The suits were filed in the Southern District of New York. Cedar Lane is represented by Rabicoff Law.
In U.S. Patent No. 6,873,743 (the “’743 Patent”), Cedar Lane claims that Skylum infringes at least claim 1 of the patent, which calls for “[a]n automated method for detecting red-eye defects in a digital image comprising: (a) identifying and labeling an image segment that includes a potential red-eye defect in the image based on a red chrominance component and a luminance component of a color map…” Skylum infringes this claim because Skylum Software’s Luminar 4 “performs automated method for detecting red-eye defects in a digital image.” Specifically, the Luminar 4 includes and AI Portrait Enhancer feature, which includes functionality to correct red-eye from a flash. The AI Portrait Enhancer “identifies and labels an image that includes a potential red-eye defect in the image based on a red chrominance component and a luminance component of a color map.” As a result of this exemplary feature, Cedar Lane accuses Skylum of infringement. Cedar Lane alleges direct, induced and compulsory infringement against Skylum for this patents-in-suit.
Cedar Lane accuses Aspiro of infringing a variety of patents with different purposes. For example, Aspiro allegedly infringes at least claim 28 of the ’609 patent, which claims “[a] method of operating a web page, comprising: displaying multiple sources of streaming content to a user in a first area of a web page;” among other important features of the claim. Cedar Lane states that Aspiro’s Tidal music streaming platform “performs a method of operating a web page.” Specifically, it “provides a Web Client,” which has features performing different actions for “creating and playing streaming content.” There is also a section of the web page for “displaying the source of the streaming content” as described in the patent. This displays “multiple sources of streaming content” and it is “displayed to a user in a first area of a web page.” For instance, Tidal “groups sources of streaming content into playlists, which are displayed in one area of the Streaming Platform display.” Content can also be grouped into “Collections” which have subcategories of “Albums, Tracks, Videos and Artists.” The similarities of Aspiro’s features and product with this patent and the other patents-in-suit have caused Cedar Lane to declare Aspiro of infringement including direct, infringement, as well as induced, and contributory infringement.
Cedar Lane claims that despite both defendants being notified of their respective infringement, they continue to infringe on their patents-in-suit.
The patents-in-suit that Skylum Software allegedly infringed are: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,873,743 (the “’743 Patent”); 7,088,855 (the “’855 Patent”); 8,073,250 (the “’250 Patent”). The patents-in-suit that Aspiro allegedly infringed are: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,452,609 (the “’609 Patent”); 6,502,194 (the “’194 Patent”); 6,526,411 (the “’411 Patent”); 6,721,489 (the “’489 Patent”); 6,806,889 (the “’889 Patent”); 7,173,177 (the “’177 Patent”); 7,610,394 (the “’394 Patent”);8,549,097 (the “’097 Patent”); and 8,805,830 (the “’830 Patent”).
