Invalidity dossier
US 8307089
System and method for storing broadcast content in a cloud-based computing environment
Current assignee: ROTHSCHILD BROADCAST DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS LLC
Added 9/23/2026, 5:22:28 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US8307089B1
Title: System and method for storing broadcast content in a cloud-based computing environment
Patent number / application: US8307089B1; Application US13/300,798
Inventor: Leigh M. Rothschild
Assignees (per supplied text): Original assignee Ariel Inventions LLC; current assignee listed as Rothschild Broadcast Distribution Systems LLC (Google Patents notes listed assignees may be inaccurate and that it performed no assignee analysis).
Key dates (as listed): Prior art date 2011-08-29; filing date 2011-11-21; publication/grant date 2012-11-06; anticipated expiration 2031-11-21. Status listed as "Expired - Fee Related."
Purpose: The text states the invention relates to a method and system for on-demand storage and delivery of media content, addressing drawbacks of subscription and flat-fee streaming models—for example, consumers paying for storage of content they never stream, or variable-length programs carrying the same flat streaming fee.
Plain-language scope (per the supplied text): A server with a receiver and processor receives media data indicating media content to be stored, determines media content characteristics, determines a length of time to store the content based on the media data, and determines a cost amount based at least in part on those characteristics and that length of time. A consumer device transmits a storage request message indicating the content to be stored and the storage length, and receives a confirmation message indicating the content is stored at the server. A further described system includes a server with memory and a processor that determines media content is available for download, determines it is not stored in memory, initiates download, receives it, and stores it; corresponding methods are also described. Figures 1–7 depict the system and processes, including example flows for processing request messages, initiating storage/streaming, and determining a cost amount.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US8307089](/patent/US8307089)/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It provides only a partial disclosure (claim text is absent), so the exact scope of allowed claims cannot be determined; it does not establish cloud-computing implementation details beyond the title, the drawings' contents, prosecution history, or the accuracy of the listed assignees or legal status.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:43:38 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8307089. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.