Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 1 of 48 PageID #: 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`LUMINATI NETWORKS LTD.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Case No.
`
`TESO LT, UAB; OXYSALES, UAB;
`METACLUSTER LT, UAB;
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff, Luminati Networks Ltd. (“Luminati” or “Plaintiff”) brings this action under the
`
`patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code, and makes the following
`
`allegations against Teso LT, UAB, also known as UAB Teso LT (“Teso”) and sister companies
`
`metacluster lt, UAB, also known as UAB metacluster lt and metacluster, UAB (“Metacluster”)
`
`and oxysales, UAB (“Oxysales”) (collectively “Defendants”):
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Luminati is an Israeli company having a principal place of business at 3
`
`Hamahshev St., Netanya 42507, ISRAEL.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Teso, previously known as UAB Tesonet
`
`(“Tesonet”), is a Lithuanian corporation located at A. Goštauto g. 40A, LT-03163, Vilnius,
`
`Lithuania. Upon information and belief, Tesonet underwent a corporate restructuring in late 2018,
`
`after the filing of Luminati’s complaint in this Court against Tesonet on July 18, 2018 (Case No.
`
`2:19-cv-299-JRG, “First Action”), resulting in the creation of the following sister companies to
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 1 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 2 of 48 PageID #: 2
`
`Teso: Metacluster; Oxysales; code200, UAB; and coretech, UAB, UAB. Upon information and
`
`belief, each of the sister companies share common ownership and control. Upon information and
`
`belief, since the restructuring in late 2018, Teso has and continues to use, offer to sell, and/or sell
`
`and/or import into the United States the patented inventions of the Asserted Patents within the
`
`United States, specifically including the “Oxylabs Residential Proxy Service” provided previously
`
`by Tesonet and as now provided and/or sold by Defendants.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Metacluster is a Lithuanian corporation
`
`related to Teso that was incorporated as the result of a corporate restructuring of Tesonet, its
`
`predecessor-in-interest. Upon information and belief, Metacluster is located at A. Goštauto g.
`
`40A, LT-03163, Vilnius, Lithuania, the same location as Teso. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendants share common ownership and control. Upon information and belief, since the
`
`restructuring in late 2018, Metacluster has and continues to use, offer to sell, and/or sell and/or
`
`import into the United States the patented inventions of the Asserted Patents within the United
`
`States, specifically including the “Real-Time Crawler” Residential Proxy Service, provided
`
`previously by predecessor in interest Tesonet. Upon information and belief, Metacluster is a
`
`successor in interest in Teso’s Real-Time Crawler residential proxy service.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Oxysales is a Lithuanian corporation
`
`related to Teso that was incorporated as the result of a corporate restructuring of Tesonet, its
`
`predecessor-in-interest. Oxysales is located at A. Goštauto g. 40A, LT-03163, Vilnius, Lithuania,
`
`the same location as the other Defendants. Upon information and belief, Defendants share
`
`common ownership and control. Upon information and belief, since the restructuring in late 2018,
`
`Oxysales has and continues to at least sell or offer to sell the residential proxy services provided
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 2 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 3 of 48 PageID #: 3
`
`by Teso and Metacluster and previously provided by predecessor in interest Tesonet. Upon
`
`information and belief, Oxysales is a successor in interest to Tesonet.
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants have and continue to use, provide, sell,
`
`and offer to sell as well as import into the United States residential proxy services including
`
`Oxylabs Residential Proxy Service and Real-Time Crawler when it uses the Residential Proxy
`
`Service (“Accused Instrumentalities”), including through direct communication with customers
`
`including customers in the United States and, for example, through Defendants’ website.
`
`https://oxylabs.io/. Upon information and belief, Defendants share common shareholders and
`
`jointly provide, sell and offer to sell the Accused Instrumentalities through the same website. As
`
`such, Defendants are jointly and severally liable for infringing the Asserted Patents.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United States
`
`of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq.
`
`7.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 1331, 1338, and 1367. Teso has not contested subject matter jurisdiction of this Court and
`
`accepted service of process in the First Action.
`
`8.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Teso because it, directly or through its
`
`subsidiaries, divisions, groups, or distributors, has sufficient minimum contacts with this forum as
`
`a result of business conducted within the State of Texas, and/or pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2).
`
`On information and belief, Teso transacts substantial business in the State of Texas, directly or
`
`through agents, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringement alleged herein, and (ii) regularly
`
`does or solicits business in Texas, engages in other persistent courses of conduct, maintains
`
`continuous and systematic contacts within this Judicial District, purposefully avails itself of the
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 3 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 4 of 48 PageID #: 4
`
`privilege of doing business in Texas, and/or derives substantial revenue from services provided in
`
`Texas. For example, Teso embeds its software, which is the subject of the infringement alleged
`
`herein, in a number of software applications which are placed into the stream of commerce with
`
`the knowledge, understanding, and/or intention that they be downloaded and executed by devices
`
`located in the State of Texas, as well as this Judicial District, including the Marshall Division.
`
`Upon information and belief, the software effectively turns the devices on which it is installed into
`
`residential proxy devices that operate as part of the service of residential proxy systems including
`
`the Accused Instrumentalities offered, operated and provided by Defendants. Teso and its
`
`predecessor in interest Tesonet have previously been the subject of jurisdiction in this Court by
`
`the same actions accused herein in the First Action.
`
`9.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Metacluster because it, directly or through
`
`its subsidiaries, divisions, groups, or distributors, has sufficient minimum contacts with this forum
`
`as a result of business conducted within the State of Texas, and/or pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`4(k)(2). On information and belief, Metacluster transacts substantial business in the State of Texas,
`
`directly or through agents, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringement alleged herein, and
`
`(ii) regularly does or solicits business in Texas, engages in other persistent courses of conduct,
`
`maintains continuous and systematic contacts within this Judicial District, purposefully avails
`
`itself of the privilege of doing business in Texas, and/or derives substantial revenue from services
`
`provided in Texas. For example, Metacluster’s Real-Time Crawler utilizes Teso’s Residential
`
`Proxy Service, which embeds software, which is the subject of the infringement alleged herein, in
`
`a number of software applications which are placed into the stream of commerce with the
`
`knowledge, understanding, and/or intention that they be downloaded and executed by devices
`
`located in the State of Texas, as well as this Judicial District, including the Marshall Division,
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 4 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 5 of 48 PageID #: 5
`
`causing these devices to serve as residential proxy devices for the Accused Instrumentalities,
`
`including Real-Time Crawler. Metacluster and its predecessor in interest Tesonet have previously
`
`been the subject of jurisdiction in this Court by the same actions accused herein in the First Action.
`
`10.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Oxysales because it, directly or through
`
`its subsidiaries, divisions, groups, or distributors, has sufficient minimum contacts with this forum
`
`as a result of business conducted within the State of Texas, and/or pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`4(k)(2). On information and belief, Oxysales transacts substantial business in the State of Texas,
`
`directly or through agents, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringement alleged herein, and
`
`(ii) regularly does or solicits business in Texas, engages in other persistent courses of conduct,
`
`maintains continuous and systematic contacts within this Judicial District, purposefully avails
`
`itself of the privilege of doing business in Texas, and/or derives substantial revenue from services
`
`provided in Texas. For example, Oxysales sells and offers for sale Defendants’ Accused
`
`Instrumentalities, which includes Defendants’ software, which is the subject of the infringement
`
`alleged herein, which is embedded in a number of software applications which are placed into the
`
`stream of commerce with the knowledge, understanding, and/or intention that they be downloaded
`
`and executed by devices located in the State of Texas, as well as this Judicial District, including
`
`the Marshall Division, causing these devices to serve as residential proxy devices for the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities. Oxysales’ predecessor in interest Tesonet has previously been the subject of
`
`jurisdiction in this Court by the same actions accused herein in the First Action.
`
`11.
`
`Upon information and belief, residential proxy devices with Defendants’ embedded
`
`software are
`
`located
`
`throughout
`
`the United States,
`
`including Texas.
`
` See e.g.
`
`https://www.privateproxyreviews.com/oxylabs/. Defendants tout the use of millions of residential
`
`proxy devices in the United States, as shown in the image below.
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 5 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 6 of 48 PageID #: 6
`
`https://oxylabs.io/locations/united-states-of-america
`
`12.
`
`This Court has general jurisdiction over Defendants due to their continuous and
`
`systematic contacts with the State of Texas and this jurisdiction. Further, Defendants are subject
`
`to this Court’s jurisdiction because they committed patent infringement in the State of Texas and
`
`
`
`this jurisdiction.
`
`13.
`
`Following Brunette Machine Works v. Kockum Industries, Inc., 406 U.S. 706
`
`1972), venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b) at least because,
`
`upon information and belief, Defendants are foreign entities.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`14.
`
`Derry Shribman and Ofer Vilenski are the sole inventors of a number of patents,
`
`including U.S. Patent Nos. 10,469,614 (Exhibit A, “’614 Patent”) issued on April 9, 2019,
`
`10,257,319 (Exhibit B, “’319 Patent”) issued on November 5, 2019, and U.S. Patent No. US
`
`10,484,510 (Exhibit C, “’510 Patent”) (collectively the “Asserted Patents”) issued on November
`
`19, 2019. Each of the Asserted Patents were issued after the filing of the complaint resulting in
`
`the First Action.
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 6 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 7 of 48 PageID #: 7
`
`15.
`
`The ’319 Patent and ’510 Patent are divisionals sharing the same specification and
`
`are both titled “System Providing Faster and More Efficient Data Communication.” The’614
`
`Patent shares the same inventors with the ’319 Patent and ’510 Patent, but it has a different
`
`specification and is titled “System and Method for Improving Communications by Using
`
`Intermediate Nodes.”
`
` Luminati
`
`identifies
`
`its patents
`
`including on
`
`its website at
`
`https://luminati.io/patent-marking#system-and-method-for-streaming-content-from-multiple-
`
`servers. Luminati is the assignee and sole owner of the Asserted Patents.
`
`16.
`
`Luminati, formerly known as Hola Networks Ltd. (“Hola”), provides a cloud
`
`service connecting tens of millions of devices over the Internet through a proxy-based network.
`
`Each participating device allows the service to utilize a fraction of that device’s idle time for the
`
`network. Luminati utilizes this network to provide proxy-based services to its customers.
`
`17.
`
`Since 2014, Luminati has offered proxy-based services relying on its “Residential
`
`Proxy Network” that practice one or more claims of the Asserted Patents. Luminati permits its
`
`business customers to utilize its residential proxy network to gather data over the Internet using
`
`residential proxy devices from various localities as required by the customers. Because each of
`
`these residential proxy devices has its own residential IP address, web servers receiving requests
`
`from these proxy devices do not recognize such requests as originating from the actual user making
`
`the request. Instead, the server identifies the request as coming from a residential device based
`
`upon the residential IP address of the proxy device. These residential proxy devices provide
`
`businesses with a number of advantages. For example, online retailers may anonymously use these
`
`residential proxy devices to gather information from web servers (such as for comparative pricing),
`
`businesses may utilize these devices to test their web sites from any city in the world, and cyber
`
`security firms may employ these devices to test web sites for malicious code.
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 7 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 8 of 48 PageID #: 8
`
`18.
`
`Prior to and separate from the technology at issue in this case, Hola provided a
`
`virtual private network (“VPN”) service called HolaVPN. Between November 2015 and June
`
`2018, Hola had a business relationship with Tesonet as well as a Tesonet-related company and
`
`service called NordVPN.
`
`19.
`
`On May 22, 2017, during a meeting between Hola Chief Executive Officer Ofer
`
`Vilenski and Teso co-founder Tomas Okmanas, Mr. Vilenski informed Mr. Okmanas that
`
`Luminati had become aware Tesonet was taking measures to enter the residential proxy business,
`
`that Luminati had patents in this field, and that Tesonet should not infringe Luminati’s patents by
`
`providing residential proxy service. Mr. Vilenski sent an email to Mr. Okmanas that same day
`
`confirming that Luminati would send a letter identifying Luminati’s intellectual property in this
`
`field.
`
`20.
`
`On June 1, 2017, outside counsel for Hola sent Mr. Okmanas and copied others at
`
`Defendants’ company a letter (Exhibit D) identifying Hola patents covering a proprietary claim
`
`scope in the field of peer-to-peer based routing. The identified Hola patents - U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`8,560,604 (“’604 Patent”) and 9,241,044 (“’044 Patent”) – are in the same patent families with the
`
`same substantive specifications as the Asserted Patents, with the ’319 Patent and ’510 Patent being
`
`divisionals of the ’604 Patent and the ’614 Patent being a divisional of the ’044 Patent.
`
`21.
`
`On February 14, 2018, Luminati sent a second letter to Mr. Okmanas, copying
`
`others at Defendants’ company referencing the June 1, 2017 letter, further informing Tesonet of
`
`Hola’s name change to Luminati and the issuance of additional patents in the field of IP VPN
`
`services using peer-to-peer technology (Exhibit E). This letter also notified Defendants that
`
`products and services offered under Teso’s Oxylabs brand infringed the ’044 Patent.
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 8 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 9 of 48 PageID #: 9
`
`22.
`
`On June 20, 2018, counsel for Defendants sent a letter to Luminati’s counsel
`
`acknowledging receipt of the February 14, 2018 letter but denying that Teso’s Oxylabs product
`
`practiced the claims of the patents in the letter. Upon information and belief, “Oxylabs” is the
`
`brand name for Defendants’ former Tesonet businesses collectively and generally, including but
`
`not limited to their residential proxy services, including the Accused Instrumentalities as further
`
`identified below:
`
`https://oxylabs.io
`
`23.
`
`On July 19, 2018, prior to the issuance of the Asserted Patents, Luminati filed a
`
`complaint for infringement of the ‘044 Patent and U.S. Patent No. 9,742,866 in the First Action in
`
`this Court.
`
`24.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants offer “large-scale web data extraction”
`
`products and services under the Oxylabs brand. https://oxylabs.io/ (Exhibit F). Upon information
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 9 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 10 of 48 PageID #: 10
`
`and belief, this includes a residential proxy network with over thirty million residential devices,
`
`each with its own IP addresses. https://oxylabs.io/. Defendants tout their residential proxy service
`
`as including “proxies in every country and every city in the world.” https://oxylabs.io/locations.
`
`Upon information and belief, these residential proxies have IP addresses that are assigned from a
`
`standard Internet Service Provider (ISP) to a homeowner or other residential or mobile user.
`
`https://oxylabs.io/. Upon information and belief, this residential proxy network is used to access
`
`content over the Internet, wherein that content is identified by a content identifier. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendants’ residential proxy network supports the residential proxy
`
`services of “Residential Proxy Service” and “Real-Time Crawler,” as shown in the images below.
`
`Upon information and belief Defendants have contractual relationships with one another related
`
`to at least the sale and use of the Accused Instrumentalities including a contractual relationship
`
`between Teso and related company Metacluster requiring Teso to provide residential proxy
`
`devices in support of Metacluster’s “Real-Time Crawler” service (also known as “RTC”). See e.g.
`
`https://oxylabs.io/legal/rtc-acceptable-use-policy; see also https://tesonet.com/about/privacy-
`
`policy/; https://oxylabs.io/legal/rpp-acceptable-use-policy;
`
`and https://oxylabs.io/legal/rtc-
`
`acceptable-use-policy.
`
`https://oxylabs.io/.
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 10 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 11 of 48 PageID #: 11
`
`https://oxylabs.io/locations
`
`
`
`https://oxylabs.io/proxies/residential-proxies. (Exhibit F)
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 11 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 12 of 48 PageID #: 12
`
`
`
`https://oxylabs.io/products/real-time-crawler
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 12 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 13 of 48 PageID #: 13
`
`https://oxylabs.io/faq. Upon information and belief, these residential proxies include residential
`
`proxy devices located in Marshall, Texas.
`
`25.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Oxylabs residential proxy network of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities is based upon numerous consumer devices or proxy devices, such as laptops and
`
`cell phones, each of which is a client device identifiable over the Internet by an identifier, such as
`
`(but not limited to) an IP address. Upon information and belief, these client devices become part
`
`of the network through the execution of Defendants’ code, such as by implementation of a software
`
`development kit (“SDK”) that is embedded in software applications downloaded on the client
`
`devices. Upon information and belief, these proxy devices are associated with at least an active
`
`state and dormant state. Upon information and belief, when the proxy device meets certain criteria,
`
`including for example sufficient battery power, sufficient available bandwidth, etc., the proxy
`
`device shifts or stays in an active state whereby it makes itself available to serve as a proxy device
`
`in the residential proxy system. However, upon information and belief, when the criteria are not
`
`met, such as for example when the device has low battery power or little available bandwidth, it
`
`enters a dormant state whereby it does not make itself available for use as a proxy device in the
`
`residential proxy service. Upon information and belief, when in the active state these devices send
`
`their identifier to a server, such as Oxylab’s dedicated proxy servers, which store these identifiers.
`
`Upon information and belief, while in the active state, these proxy devices remain available to
`
`receive requests submitted through the Accused Instrumentalities and send the requests to a target
`
`web server, as well as sending any content received from the target web server to Defendants’
`
`requesting customer via an intermediary of the Accused Instrumentalities such as a supernode.
`
`26.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants have developed or are developing
`
`Oxylabs embedded software for different platforms including but not limited to Google Android
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 13 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 14 of 48 PageID #: 14
`
`and Microsoft Windows. Upon information and belief, while frequently renamed, the above
`
`Oxylabs embedded software that enables the residential proxy network includes embedded code
`
`named “genericexitnode,” “winnerbot,” “CoffeeService,” “instantcoffee,” and “ENService.”
`
`27.
`
`Upon information and belief, the above Oxylabs embedded code has been
`
`integrated and is believed to be currently embedded in a number of applications via Defendants’
`
`application partners including at least the following software application(s) that may be
`
`downloaded by any user located anywhere having Internet access: Auslogic’s “Auslogics Disk
`
`Defrag Free;” Hackdrip’s “WallPixel;” Vagner Xavier’s “Currency Converter X;” and
`
`“Screenshot Lite.”
`
`See
`
`e.g.
`
`https://www.auslogics.com/en/eula/?product=disk-defrag;
`
`http://vsxapps.com/privacy/; https://snowlife01.com/ScreenshotLite/privacy_policy.html; and
`
`https://hackdrip.com/wallpixel-privacy-policy/.
`
`28.
`
`Defendants provide a
`
`residential proxy service
`
`through
`
`the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities allowing an Oxylabs service customer to utilize residential proxy devices in
`
`fetching content over the Internet. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ embedded code
`
`installed on the residential proxy devices causes the devices to perform the steps of at least claims
`
`1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, and 29 of the ’614 Patent, claims 1, 17, 24, 25 and 27 of the ’319
`
`Patent, and claims 1, 8, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 22, and 23 of the ’510 Patent. This embedded code is
`
`under the control of Defendants, either directly or via Defendants’ contractual relationship with its
`
`software application partners, including partners integrating Defendants’ SDK in their
`
`applications. As this code is under the control of Defendants, Defendants cause each of these steps
`
`to also be performed. In addition, given Defendants’ contractual relationship with its customers,
`
`the customers utilization of the Accused Instrumentalities also causes each of the claimed steps to
`
`be performed.
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 14 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 15 of 48 PageID #: 15
`
`29.
`
`Specifically, upon information and belief, Defendants’ residential proxy network
`
`comprises numerous proxy devices, each of which is a client device such as a laptop or smartphone
`
`identifiable by its own identifier, such as (but not limited to) an IP address, with Defendants’
`
`embedded code operating on that device. Upon information and belief, the proxy devices of the
`
`Accused Instrumentalities send its identifier to a server of the Accused Instrumentalities, such as
`
`a supernode, following the proxy device connecting to the Internet and the proxy devices and
`
`server of the Accused Instrumentalities communicate periodically thereafter. Upon information
`
`and belief, each proxy device is associated with a first and second state (“first state” or “second
`
`state”) according to a utilization of a resource, such as for example battery life, bandwidth usage
`
`or a threshold value associated with idleness. Upon information and belief, a periodic or
`
`continuous determination is made whether the device satisfies a criterion for resource utilization,
`
`and based upon that determination, such as for example when a threshold value associated with
`
`idleness is above or below that threshold, shifts the proxy device between a first state or second
`
`state. Upon information and belief, when the criterion is satisfied and the proxy device is in the
`
`first state, the proxy device is responsive to receiving a request from the server of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities. Upon information and belief, the determination of whether the device satisfies a
`
`criterion for resource utilization is made on the proxy device. Upon receiving a request, the proxy
`
`device performs a task. See e.g. https://learn.oxylabs.io/hc/en-us/articles/360012784812-How-
`
`often-are-residential-proxies-checked-for-availability;
`
`https://learn.oxylabs.io/hc/en-
`
`us/articles/360024814952-How-long-can-I-keep-the-same-residential-IP-for.
`
`30.
`
`Defendants’ end user license agreement (“EULA”) notifies end users that using an
`
`application containing Defendants’ SDK allows Oxylabs to access and use the end user’s device
`
`to “access and collect data on “publicly accessible data resources.” Exhibit G at 1. The EULA
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 15 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 16 of 48 PageID #: 16
`
`expressly states “We use your device resources when the device is idle and is on Wi-Fi connection
`
`(cellular data may be used only occasionally and restrictedly) …. To be able to do that we process
`
`a limited amount of your personal Information (such as your IP address, device type, network
`
`connection type and status, etc.)” as shown in the image below.
`
`
`
`https://luminati.io/legal/sdk-sla
`
`31.
`
`Upon information and belief, having received a request from a server of the
`
`Accused Instrumentalities, the proxy device is used to fetch content identified by a content
`
`identifier over the Internet from a web server, which stores the content. Upon information and
`
`belief, the proxy device fetches content by (a) receiving a content identifier from the server of the
`
`Accused Instrumentalities; (b) sending the content identifier to the web server; (c) receiving the
`
`content from the web server in response to the sending of the content identifier to the web server;
`
`and (d) sending the content to the server of the Accused Instrumentalities. Upon information and
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 16 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 17 of 48 PageID #: 17
`
`belief, the above steps are executed including, for example, on the proxy device by Defendants’
`
`software installed on that device, which can be downloaded on that device from servers on the
`
`Internet.
`
`32.
`
`Upon information and belief, the content may include a part or whole files, text,
`
`numbers, audio, voice, multimedia, video, images, music, computer program, or a part or a whole
`
`of a web-site page. Upon information and belief, the content may be identified by a uniform
`
`resource locator.
`
`33.
`
`Upon information and belief, web servers are or include Hypertext Transfer
`
`Protocol (HTTP) servers that respond to HTTP requests including both normal HTTP and HTTPS
`
`requests, and the proxy device may send an HTTP request comprising the content identifier to the
`
`web server. Further, upon information and belief, the proxy device may establish Transmission
`
`Control Protocol (TCP) connections with the server of the Accused Instrumentalities and web
`
`server, with the content identifier and content sent over the established TCP connections to and
`
`from the proxy device. Similarly, upon information and belief, the proxy device may establish a
`
`TCP connection with the web server.
`
`34.
`
`Upon information and belief, each proxy device stores, operates or uses a client
`
`operating system including but not limited to a mobile operating system such as Android version
`
`2.2, 2.3, 4.0, 4.2, 4.4, and Microsoft Windows Phone version 7, 8, and 9.
`
`35.
`
`The use of the residential proxy network permits anonymity to Oxylabs customers,
`
`such as for engaging in activities like as web crawling, without disclosing its identity to the targeted
`
`web sites.
`
`36.
`
`Since the filing of a previous complaint in this Court in the First Action on July 19,
`
`2018 (Exhibit H) Defendants have posted information on its website under the title of “Bust the
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 17 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 18 of 48 PageID #: 18
`
`Bully: $100,000 for Prior Art” including allegations that Luminati (a) is “threatening companies
`
`for alleged patent infringement without any evidence,” (b) “chooses to harass big and small
`
`companies alike” (c) “is also trying to disrupt its competitors’ ability to compete on equal terms
`
`by sending lawsuit threats to clients of the competing companies,” (d) “is using this unjustified
`
`business method to intimidate smaller market players,” (e) is “engaged in deceptive behavior,” and
`
`(f) “has no patent rights outside of the United States because their European applications for
`
`patents mentioned above have been withdrawn due to lack of novelty.” https://oxylabs.io/bounty.
`
`This webpage includes an offer of a “bounty” for “prior art that will be successfully used to
`
`invalidate Luminati’s patents.”
`
`37.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants have advertised the $100,000 bounty
`
`above on its own website as well as on other publicly accessible websites, including Google. As
`
`shown in the first two images below, Defendants had placed an advertisement through its Oxylabs
`
`brand specifically targeting the Luminati brand that displays its bounty against Luminati upon a
`
`search of “luminati” in Google’s webpage. The Teso / Oxylabs hyperlink directs viewers to Teso’s
`
`“Bust the Bully” webpage. The below images are exemplary Defendants’ advertisements posted
`
`since the filing of the original complaint.
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 18 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 19 of 48 PageID #: 19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 19 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 20 of 48 PageID #: 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 20 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 21 of 48 PageID #: 21
`
`38.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants directed the above advertising toward
`
`Luminati’s customers and prospective customers seeking to harm Luminati’s business
`
`relationships.
`
`39.
`
` Upon information and belief, Defendants created a website designed to disparage
`
`and attack Luminati
`
`in response
`
`to
`
`the previous
`
`lawsuit filed against Teso. See
`
`http://www.darksideofluminati.com/ (Exhibit X). This website lists an author, Marcus Jackson,
`
`which upon information and belief is a pseudonym for Teso. This webpage includes numerous
`
`falsehoods and rhetorical questions intended to disparage Luminati.
`
`
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 21 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 22 of 48 PageID #: 22
`
`http://www.darksideofluminati.com/
`
`40.
`
`Luminati’s SDK License includes the following terms:
`
`https://luminati.io/legal/sdk-license
`
`
`
`
`
`CODE200 ET AL. EXHIBIT 1033
`Page 22 of 48
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00395-JRG Document 1 Filed 12/06/19 Page 23 of 48 PageID #: 23
`
`41.
`
`Luminati’s SDK partners are contractually obligated to ensure that only their
`
`customers who expressly elect to be a peer on the Luminati network will be identified as such and
`
`only for as long as these users do not change their election. Luminati similarly imposes rules
`
`restricting the usage of a peer device based on certain criteria including for example, device battery
`
`level, maximum daily and weekly b