Digital Island versus Akamai: Both Winners

Digital Island and Akamai's patent feud is over. A U.S. District Court jury ruled that Digital Island does infringe Akamai's core Internet content delivery patent, and that Akamai does not infringe Digital Island's patent. The jury declared Digital Island first inventor of Internet content delivery network (CDN) technology.

This ruling made Akamai's claims for U.S. Patent 6,108,703 (the basis for their FreeFlow content delivery product) invalid. Consecutively, the jury also ruled in favor of Digital Island finding that its Footprint system does not infringe Akamai's client-side-testing patent (U.S. Patent 6,003,030) acquired in its purchase of InterVu, Inc. In turn, the jury found that Akamai does not infringe on Digital Island's content delivery network Truename patent. The rulings came after a two-week trial in a U.S. District Court of Massachusetts responding to the companies' filed lawsuits last year. Akamai sued Digital Island for infringing two Internet content delivery patents. The jury ruled in favor of Akamai for both: U.S. patent 6,108,703 issued in the name of Akamai founders, Tom Leighton and the late Danny Lewin, and U.S. patent 6,003,030 owned by Akamai.

Digital Island sued Akamai for infringement of their content delivery network Truename patent, U.S. patent 5,987,791. The jury ruled in favor of Akamai, finding that the company's technology does not infringe that patent. Digital Island's Truename content delivery network is said to ensure that only the freshest information is served to Web sites and ways to optimize content storage by avoiding duplication of information.

According to a release by Digital Island, the company expects to appeal any adverse decisions affecting its intellectual property to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition, the company currently seeks redress on several patent validity issues before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). The jury was not asked to consider damages in this trial. The issue of damages is subject to a separate trial at a later date.