Cooperative Entertainment, Inc. v. Kollective Technology, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 20245:20-cv-07273California3,074 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

26 This is Kollective’s third motion to dismiss. See ECF Nos. 19, 41. In the interest of 27 brevity, the Court will only summarize those facts relevant to this motion. 1 CEI is the owner of the ’452 Patent, entitled “Systems and Methods for Dynamic 2 Networked Peer-to-Peer Content Distribution.” SAC, Ex. B (“’452 Patent”). The ’452 Patent 3 relates to systems and methods of structuring a peer-to-peer (“P2P”) dynamic network for 4 distributing large files. Id. ¶ 16. It claims methods and systems for a network in which content 5 distribution occurs “outside controlled networks and/or content distribution networks (CDNs).” 6 Id. ¶ 23. It does this with dynamic P2P networks comprising of “peer nodes,” i.e., nodes 7 consuming the same content contemporaneously, that transmit content directly to each other 8 instead of receiving content from the CDN. Id. ¶¶ 22, 23. To facilitate content distribution, the 9 claimed P2P networks segment content combining several unconventional techniques, including 10 “CDN address resolution, trace route to CDN and the P2P server manager, dynamic feedback from 11 peers reporting traffic rates between…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.