|
Burst.com
Files Patent & Antitrust Lawsuit Against Microsoft
Complaint
Alleges Technology Misappropriation and Patent
Infringement by Software Giant
Santa
Rosa, CA:
Burst.com, Inc. (OTC: BRST) Chairman & CEO Richard
Lang today announced that Burst.com has filed a lawsuit
accusing software giant Microsoft Corporation of
violations of the Patent Act, Sherman Act Sections 1
& 2, California Cartwright Act (anti-trust),
California Business & Professions Code Section 17200
(unfair acts or practices), the California Trade Secrets
Act and for breach of contract. Burst.com is being
represented in the action by San Francisco law firm
Hosie, Frost, Large & McArthur; and Palo Alto
intellectual property law firm Carr-Ferrell, LLP.
In
the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California Tuesday, June 18th,
Burst alleges that:
1. Microsoft’s
newly announced “Corona” product uses technologies
and
trade
secrets misappropriated from Burst.com. These
proprietary technologies are protected by numerous U.S.
and International patents (and patents pending).
Microsoft met with Burst over a two-year period and
negotiated unsuccessfully for the rights to use
Burst’s innovative technology.
2.
Microsoft anticompetitively damaged Burst in violation
of federal and state antitrust laws in many of the same
ways that prompted the federal courts to find that it
monopolized the market for Intel-compatible operating
systems.
Lang
claims that Burst technology is essential to Microsoft,
because it enables high quality video-on-demand over the
Internet, which is key to Microsoft’s .NET strategy
via Windows Media Platform applications. “Microsoft
clearly sees high-quality video and audio delivery as
their ticket into dominating the Internet-video enabled
set-top box market, as well as the Internet appliance
market,” said Lang. "Burstware is the ‘3rd
generation streaming’ technology that Microsoft has
been bragging about as if it was their own."
Burst
currently licenses Burstware, its faster-than-real-time
streaming media delivery platform. The company believes
this innovative technology could one day become the
standard for Internet-based video-on-demand.
“We
spent over a decade patenting and developing burst
technology in anticipation of the markets that are now
emerging." said Lang. "Microsoft’s operating
system monopoly put it in the position to simply take
our technology and our business opportunities. Microsoft
has found that it pays to misappropriate the innovations
created by others. We’re asking the court to prevent
that from happening here."
A
web link to the complete complaint as well a collection
of Questions and Answers about this issue can be found
at: http://www.burst.com/new/newsevents/legalactivity.htm
About
Burst.com:
Burst.com,
headquartered in Santa Rosa, California, is the
developer of Faster-Than-Real-Time™ and Burst-Enabled™
video and audio delivery software. Burst.com’s
Burstware® provides high-quality delivery of
full-motion video and CD-quality audio over IP-based
networks. The company, established in1990, has built an
international patent portfolio covering bursting, video
delivery scheduling and Rapid-casting. Burstware®,
Faster-Than-Real-Time™ and Burst-Enabled™ are
trademarks of Burst.com.
More information about Burst.com is available at www.burst.com.
This News Release contains statements concerning
Burst.com, Inc.’s allegations and expectations
regarding its technology, Microsoft’s misappropriation
of its technology and the capabilities and potential of
its product. These
statements constitute forward-looking statements for the
purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
Although we believe that these forward-looking
statements are based on a reasonable perception of the
facts and reasonable assumptions and expectations, the
statements are subject to and involve numerous
uncertainties and risks.
Factors that could affect the actual results
include potentially unknown facts and matters that will
be discovered during the course of the litigation, and
the effects of competing technologies on our product.
These risks and uncertainties should be
considered in evaluating the forward-looking statements,
and undue reliance should not be placed on such
statements. The
Company shall not be responsible to update any such
forward-looking statements.
30
| 
