Surveillance Tech Company Sues US Government For Patent Infringement

from the cornering-the-intrusion-market dept

Here’s an interesting angle for attacking the surveillance state. Use patents.

[A] small business that designs, installs and services digital video surveillance systems, 3rd Eye Surveillance, [has] sued the United States federal government for alleged patent infringement. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, seeking damages exceeding $1 billion for unlawful use of the company’s three video and image surveillance system patents – U.S. Patent Nos. 6,778,085, 6,798,344, and 7,323,980. The surveillance system patents are owned by Discovery Patents, LLC of Baltimore Maryland, who is also a Plaintiff in the case, and exclusively licensed by 3rd Eye Surveillance.

Despite its Plano, Texas headquarters, 3rd Eye Surveillance appears to actually sell goods and services, rather than just litigate from an empty office bearing nothing more than the company name plate. Patent holder James Otis Faulkner pushed these patents through in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in order to give citizens and law enforcement better, faster connections to real-time surveillance footage.

In addition to contract work and direct sales, 3rd Eye also makes a bit of money litigating.

This trio of patents, which have been successfully used against more than 10 municipalities and private businesses, allows for the provision of real-time surveillance video, audio recognition, facial recognition and infrared images to emergency responders and defense agencies.

3rd Eye is claiming the US government’s wide-ranging “exploitation” of its unlicensed patents is worth $1 billion. The suit names several agencies directly, while holding the option to name others as needed.

The Defendant is the United States of America, acting through its various agencies, including by way of example, and not limitation, the Department of Justice, the Department Of Homeland Security, USSTRATCOM, the Department of Defense, the United States Customs and Border Protection, the United States Army, the United States Navy, and the Defense Logistics Agency.

Basically, any agency deploying a surveillance system that can be monitored and/or utilizing voice/facial recognition software is a potential target. $1 billion seems to be the floor for damages. In addition to the government agencies named, the suit also alleges indirect infringement by private corporations through their contracts with the government. The list includes government contracting heavyweights Motorola and Booz Allen Hamilton, along with a few others — again, just “by example” and “not limited” to those listed in the lawsuit.

Of course, this won’t be shutting down any existing government surveillance systems. It may result in a payout for 3rd Eye, but the suit doesn’t seek an injunction halting the use of the allegedly infringing tech while the court sorts it out. Possibly this is due to the patent owner’s respect for a healthy surveillance state or, more likely, that an injunction encompassing multiple government agencies would never be granted, especially when it affects “public interest” hotspots like counterterrorism and law enforcement.

The government hasn’t filed a response at this point, so the patents it claims to use in its surveillance gear have yet to be discussed. If this suit survives a motion for dismissal or isn’t immediately settled, things could get interesting if the government is forced to discuss the specifics of its surveillance tech. Of course, “interesting” may be in theory only. If the discussion runs deep enough or lasts long enough, this lawsuit will soon be littered with sealed documents, ex parte presentations to the presiding judge and black ink all over the place.

Filed Under: ,
Companies: 3rd eye surveillance

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Surveillance Tech Company Sues US Government For Patent Infringement”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

This is comedy gold! ๐Ÿ˜€ At the very least the U.S. justice system allows for it. ๐Ÿ™‚

NSA, FBI, CIA spy on people, get sued by third party for stealing the ideas used to make the tools to spy on people.

If this becomes public enough, expect even more nasty s**t to float to the surface (heavily redacted), legally this time.

Also expect your average citizen to just sigh and go back to work as usual.

Anonymous Coward says:

Merely FYI, this is a claim solely for money damages filed against the USG in the Court of Federal Claims under the provisions of 28 USC 1498, a provision of law having as its underlying principle the government’s constitutional obligation to pay reasonable and entire compensation fot the taking of private property. The reason injunctive relief is not being sought is because injunctive relief is nothing that the court has the power to grant. Its remedial powers are limited to solely money damages.

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Nothing will come of this

They don’t have to. The government can, in most cases, simply use the patent without paying. From

Federal contractors, however, can use patent rights owned by others without obtaining a license or paying royalties. By statute, the military and other government agencies have the right to use any patented invention to further valid government missions, and this right may be extended to government contractors.

The result is that the unlicensed use of patented inventions by federal contractors may not be illegal, or wrongful, depending on the usage.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Nothing will come of this

In the event a patent is infringed by or for the USG and with its authorization and consent, a patent holder’s recourse is generally a claim filed in the Federal Court of Claims pursuant to 28 USC 1498 for reasonable and entire compensation, i.e., money damages.

I say “generally” because there are several factual scenarios where a contractor/subcontractor may incur iability without the legal ability to shift all responsibility to the USG.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Nothing will come of this

Government to patent holders:
“Sucks to be you”

So in the age of “Because terrorism” and “Won’t somebody think of the children” the government can use any and all patents it wants to.
Does this include drug patents? So a federal sub-contractor can cook up anything because terrorism. Oh all those free cancer/truth drugs.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ยป

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...