Source Code Review: Cryptography
A Texas-based SME was involved in a patent infringement case against five well-known software companies that develop Android/iOS mobile applications for enterprise customers. The two asserted patents covered a software-implemented security algorithm. The outside counsel lacked technical skills to review complex source code and at the same time desired to keep discovery costs low for the client.
Copperpod IP stepped in to help the outside counsel conduct a series of code reviews and refine the infringement theory on 5 ongoing patent cases. Our expert visited the opposing counsel office and conducted each code review following a three-step process:
Using industry standard code review tools and techniques, Copperpod IP expert gained a quick overview of each production, identifying:
Products and modules produced
Size and Programming Language of the code
Missing products and modules
Missing documentation referenced in the code
Top developer names and dates
Code from third parties
Estimates for reviewing the code in detail
2. Detailed Review
After the initial reconnaissance of each production, Copperpod IP’s expert conducting an in-depth review of the source code to identify the code that implemented each of the claim limitations across the two asserted patents. Using industry standard code review platforms, the expert also generated various UML diagrams to help understand and navigate the code quickly. The expert prepared multiple memoranda containing detailed notes on how the code worked on a function-by-function level as well as other key insights responsive to the case.
All relevant code excerpts were requested for printing and indexed with BATES numbers.
Within 10 days of completing each review, using evidence found in the code and documentation produced during discovery, Copperpod IP’s expert not only substantiated the existing theories with key evidence, but also proposed an additional theory of infringement.
The additional theory was based on a well-known network security standard used across the internet – and used by the defendants to distribute their software on existing software platforms. The scope of the cases was thus expanded to include additional infringing steps – which were included and substantiated with detailed explanations and excerpts in the supplemented infringement contentions.
The expert also identified references in the code to missing documentation that had been overlooked during document production but were responsive to the case.
All five defendants settled favorably with the client shortly after the supplemented infringement contentions bearing Copperpod IP’s work product were served.
The additional theory of infringement allowed the client to seek an increased monetary amount in the ongoing cases as well as to identify other infringing targets. Consequently, the client filed more than 15 new cases – all of which have also resulted in favorable settlements over the course of the campaign.
Copperpod IP continues to work closely with the client on ongoing monetization of the patent assets.