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.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: patents, surveillance
Companies: 3rd eye surveillance

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2015 @ 1:29pm

    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.

Add Your Comment

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat

Warning: include(/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ on line 8

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/share/pear:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/..') in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ on line 8
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.