Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 163
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 163
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 5
`EXHIBIT 5
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL
`FILED UNDER SEAL
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 2 of 163
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`
`
`Civil Case No. 6 :21-CV-569-ADA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________________________________________
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`Plaintiff,
` )
`
`
` )
` v.
`
` )
`
`
` )
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
` )
`
`
` )
`
`
` )
`
`
` )
`
`Defendant.
` )
`__________________________________________)
`
`
`
`
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`November 14, 2022
`Conshohocken, Pennsylvania
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________________________________
`Mark J. Chandler
`
`
`CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 3 of 163
`
`
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`Table of Contents
`
`PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS AND QUALIFICATIONS .................................... 1
`I.
`II. ASSIGNMENT .................................................................................................................... 4
`III. DATA AND OTHER INFORMATION CONSIDERED ................................................ 6
`IV. PATENTS-IN-SUIT ............................................................................................................ 7
`V.
`BACKGROUND OF THE PARTIES, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES .................. 9
`A. Relevant Entities .......................................................................................................... 10
`i.
`Touchstream Technologies, Inc. ........................................................................ 10
`ii.
`Google LLC ....................................................................................................... 12
`B. Marketplace ................................................................................................................. 14
`i.
`Media Streaming Device Market ....................................................................... 14
`ii.
`Smart TVs .......................................................................................................... 17
`C. Chromecast Technology .............................................................................................. 19
`D. Google Ecosystem ....................................................................................................... 21
`VI. RELEVANT PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ................................................................. 30
`A. Google and Third-Party Devices that Benefit from Chromecast Technology ............ 30
`i.
`Google Chromecast Enabled Devices ............................................................... 32
`ii.
`Third Party Device Products that are Chromecast Enabled Devices ............... 36
`B. Google Services that Benefit from Chromecast Technology ...................................... 41
`VII. ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTIONS ................................................................................... 41
`A. Google and Third-Party Devices that Benefit from Chromecast Technology ............ 42
`B. Google Services that Benefit from Chromecast Technology ...................................... 48
`i.
`Advertising ......................................................................................................... 49
`ii.
`Google Play Store .............................................................................................. 51
`iii.
`YouTube Services ............................................................................................... 52
`iv. Google Play TV and Movies on Demand .......................................................... 56
`v.
`Other .................................................................................................................. 57
`VIII. THE HYPOTHETICAL NEGOTIATION .................................................................... 58
`A. Positions and Perspectives of the Parties Prior to the Hypothetical Negotiation ........ 60
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`i
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 4 of 163
`
`
`
`The Parties in 2012 and 2013 ........................................................................... 61
`i.
`B. Licensing and Settlement History of the Parties ......................................................... 63
`i.
`Licensing History and Practices of Touchstream ............................................. 66
`ii.
`Licenses History and Practices of Google ........................................................ 76
`C. The Hypothetical Negotiation License ........................................................................ 78
`i.
`Considerations For the Hypothetical Negotiation License ............................... 79
`ii.
`Non-Exclusivity .................................................................................................. 84
`iii.
`Term of the License ........................................................................................... 85
`IX. DAMAGES APPROACHES ............................................................................................ 86
`A. Per Unit Royalty Approach ......................................................................................... 86
`B. Revenue-Based Royalty Approach to Account for Direct Quantifiable Revenues ... 101
`i.
`Chromecast Enabled Device (“CED”) Revenue ............................................. 103
`ii.
`Advertising Revenue ........................................................................................ 106
`iii. Content Revenue .............................................................................................. 109
`iv. Other Revenue Streams ................................................................................... 116
`v.
`Apportionment For Purposes of Revenue Analysis ......................................... 117
`C. Lifetime Value Approach .......................................................................................... 120
`X. DAMAGES FOR THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT ............................................................... 136
`A. The Book of Wisdom ................................................................................................ 136
`B. Georgia-Pacific Factors ............................................................................................. 137
`C. Consideration of the Georgia-Pacific Factors With Regard to a Running Royalty Rate
` ................................................................................................................................... 149
`XI. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS .......................................................................................... 154
`XII. PREJUDGMENT AND POST-JUDGMENT INTEREST ......................................... 158
`XIII. EXHIBITS ....................................................................................................................... 159
`XIV. POSSIBLE REVISIONS TO THIS REPORT ............................................................. 159
`XV. PROFESSIONAL FEE ARRANGEMENT .................................................................. 159
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`ii
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 5 of 163
`
`
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`I.
`
`1.
`
`I am currently a Managing Director with Upstream Partners, Inc. In this role, I
`
`specialize in the empirical analysis related to intellectual property (“IP”) disputes.
`
`I also specialize in the valuation and licensing of IP assets. As part of my work, I
`
`have previously been qualified as an expert in federal and state courts with regard
`
`to damages and licensing practices in both IP and breach of contract matters. In
`
`addition, I have consulted regularly for corporations, universities, secured creditors’
`
`committees, small companies, and individuals in matters involving taxation,
`
`mergers and acquisitions, valuation of assets (including IP assets) in bankruptcy
`
`proceedings, and litigation proceedings.
`
`2.
`
`I have worked on numerous legal disputes over the past 15 years, including contract
`
`disputes and patent litigation matters, and I have conducted complex studies of
`
`associated financial damages. I have prepared analyses for the calculation and
`
`evaluation of lost sales and lost profits, reasonable royalty, price erosion, value of
`
`IP and technology and prejudgment interest, among others. In many cases, I have
`
`testified on my analyses and opinions.
`
`3.
`
`I assist clients with IP strategy development and licensing transactions. I have
`
`represented IP owners (often IP licensors) as well as users of IP (often licensees),
`
`including manufacturers, distributors and others, in developing their licensing
`
`strategies, and in many cases negotiating the licenses on their behalf.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`1
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 6 of 163
`
`
`
`4.
`
`I have been engaged in the technology and patent valuation and licensing business
`
`for over 25 years. Over that time, I have helped early-stage ventures, universities,
`
`research institutes, companies of all sizes, and independent inventors license,
`
`develop, and value their IP assets and technology. My university clients have
`
`included (among many others) Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University,
`
`and the University of Pennsylvania; my corporate clients have included (among
`
`many others) Yahoo!, General Electric, and Samsung.
`
`5.
`
`Early in my career, I worked for the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab and for
`
`Allied Signal in the development of atomic clocks. I also designed precision
`
`measurement systems which incorporated advanced statistical approaches to the
`
`measurement of selected timing-related parameters. I have also taught statistics for
`
`internal corporate classes.
`
`6.
`
`From 1997 to 2005, I was Global Vice President and a member of the Senior
`
`Management Team of a publicly traded patent licensing company, BTG plc.
`
`(BTG:LSE), where I led global teams in licensing, investing in and developing
`
`technology and patents. While at BTG, I led and/or managed negotiations in over
`
`60 patent and technology licensing transactions. In my career, I have led and/or
`
`managed well over 150 technology-licensing programs in North America, Europe,
`
`and Asia.
`
`7.
`
`I led the venture capital operations for BTG for five years and served on the
`
`Executive Committee and Board of Directors of Primaxis Technology Ventures, a
`
`venture fund in Canada. While I was in these roles at BTG and Primaxis, our funds
`
`invested in approximately 30 companies, two-thirds of which were in high
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`2
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 7 of 163
`
`
`
`technology sectors such as semiconductors and electronics. In many instances, the
`
`investment decisions were informed, in significant parts, by our assessments of
`
`those companies’ IP assets and their plans and strategies for commercializing those
`
`IP assets.
`
`8.
`
`From 2005 to the present, I have conducted IP, technology and company valuations
`
`in many contexts, including consulting, negotiations, asset transfers, patent
`
`litigation, contract disputes and bankruptcy, to name a few. As Managing Director
`
`and partner at Invotex Group, a national consulting firm specializing in complex
`
`financial matters, I led the firm’s practice in IP Transactions, assisting clients with
`
`IP licensing and valuation, patent damages analysis and the development of IP-
`
`based partnerships. For patent litigation, I have prepared financial damages
`
`analyses for clients across many industries and I have testified in patent
`
`infringement and licensing/contract dispute matters.
`
`9.
`
`During my career, I have analyzed well over 2,000 license agreements for various
`
`purposes, including auditing royalties, auditing performance against financial or
`
`other license milestones, projecting royalty income from royalty-bearing licenses,
`
`and preparing valuations. I have personally negotiated over 100 patent agreements.
`
`10.
`
`I have presented on the topics of IP valuation, complex licensing issues, IP asset
`
`management and negotiation numerous times in Asia, North America, and Europe.
`
`11.
`
`I have been an active member of the Licensing Executives Society (“LES”) since
`
`the 1990s and I was co-chair of the LES chapter in the Philadelphia area for many
`
`years. I received the credential of a Certified Licensing Professional by the
`
`Licensing Executives Society in the first year that the certification was issued. “The
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`3
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 8 of 163
`
`
`
`Certified Licensing Professional (CLP) program is a professional designation
`
`intended to distinguish those who have demonstrated experience, proficiency,
`
`knowledge and exposure to licensing and commercialization of intellectual
`
`property through active involvement in patenting, marketing, valuation, IP law,
`
`negotiation, business development and Intellectual asset management.”1 I am also
`
`a member of the Association for University Technology Managers.
`
`12.
`
`I was selected by the international journal of IP management, the Intellectual Asset
`
`Management (“IAM”) magazine, to its inaugural list of the Top 250 professionals
`
`worldwide in intellectual asset management strategy (now the IAM “Top 300 IP
`
`Strategists”), and I have been named to this peer-selected list in each of the 13 years
`
`(including 2022) in which the IAM has compiled the list.2
`
`13.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from Bucknell
`
`University and earned my Master of Business Administration degree from the
`
`Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
`
`14. My business address is 1950 Butler Pike, #250, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania
`
`19428. Exhibit 1 is a copy of my curriculum vitae that describes my background
`
`and experience in greater detail.
`
`II.
`
`ASSIGNMENT
`
`15. My firm, Upstream Partners, and I have been retained by the law firm of Shook,
`
`Hardy & Bacon, counsel to Touchstream Technology, Inc. (“Touchstream”), as an
`
`
`1 “Frequently Asked Questions,” Certified Licensing Professionals website, www.licensingcertification.org/for-
`candidates/frequently-asked-questions/.
`2 “Methodology,” IAM, www.iam-media.com/directories/strategy300/info/methodology.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`4
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 9 of 163
`
`
`
`expert on certain damages and other matters relevant to the patent litigation
`
`Touchstream Technologies, Inc. v. Google LLC (the “Litigation”).3 In particular, I
`
`have been asked to analyze and, if called upon, to testify concerning damages
`
`relating to Google LLC’s (“Google”) infringement of patents owned by
`
`Touchstream. I have also been asked to analyze and provide opinions on matters
`
`pertaining to common practices in IP license agreements and terms and conditions
`
`typically contained within such agreements.
`
`16.
`
`I understand that in patent infringement litigation, the patent laws provide for
`
`damages to a prevailing patent holder in an amount that compensates for the
`
`infringement: “Upon finding for the claimant the court shall award the claimant
`
`damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a
`
`reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by the court.”4
`
`17.
`
`I understand that a reasonable royalty can be determined through an analysis of
`
`what a willing licensor and a willing licensee would have bargained for during an
`
`arm’s-length, hypothetical negotiation occurring on the eve of infringement, with
`
`each side agreeing that the patents are valid and infringed.5 While there is no set
`
`formula for determining the amount of a reasonable royalty, a number of factors
`
`may bear on the question, including those described in Georgia-Pacific
`
`Corporation v. United States Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970).
`
`
`3 Complaint for Patent Infringement, June 4, 2021 (the “Complaint”).
`4 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`5 Laser Dynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51, 76 (Fed. Cir. 2012). (“[T]he basic question posed in a
`hypothetical negotiation is: if, on the eve of infringement, a willing licensor and licensee had entered into an agreement
`instead of allowing infringement of the patent to take place, what would that agreement be?”).
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`5
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 10 of 163
`
`
`
`I have considered all of these factors in reaching the conclusions I describe in this
`
`report. I address these factors throughout various sections of my report. In addition,
`
`I also considered and addressed the application of the “analytical approach”6 as an
`
`alternative methodology to the determination of reasonable royalties.
`
`18.
`
`I am submitting this report addressing the issues on which I expect to be asked to
`
`testify at trial.
`
`19.
`
`I have testified as an expert witness numerous times in federal and state court. My
`
`curriculum vitae, which sets forth my qualifications, as well as a list of cases in
`
`which I have participated as an expert witness for at least the past five years is
`
`attached as Exhibit 1.
`
`III. DATA AND OTHER INFORMATION CONSIDERED
`
`20.
`
`In arriving at the conclusions outlined below, I have based my opinions in this case
`
`on my extensive experience with damages analysis, patent valuation, negotiations,
`
`and licensing; independent research and analysis of publicly available information;
`
`interviews with experts and Touchstream executives; and my review of various
`
`documents, deposition testimony, and pleadings produced to date by Touchstream
`
`and Google. In addition to the documents cited throughout this report, I considered
`
`the documents identified in Exhibit 2 in forming the opinions expressed in this
`
`report.
`
`21.
`
`In addition to opinions outlined in this report, I may also provide testimony (1) in
`
`rebuttal to Google’s positions, including opinions of its experts and materials they
`
`
`6 See, e.g., TWM Mfg. Co. v. Dura Corp., 789 F.2d 895, 899 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`6
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 11 of 163
`
`
`
`discuss or rely upon, (2) based on any Orders from the Court, (3) based on
`
`documents, contentions, or other discovery that Google or others have not yet
`
`produced or were produced too late to be considered before my report was due, or
`
`(4) based on witness testimony which has not been given or was given too late to
`
`be considered before my report was due. I reserve the right to supplement or amend
`
`my opinions as further documentation and information is received.
`
`22.
`
`If called to testify in this matter, I may use as exhibits various documents produced
`
`in this matter that refer or relate to the matters discussed in this report. I have not
`
`yet selected the particular exhibits that may be used. In addition, I may create or
`
`assist in the creation of certain demonstrative exhibits or summaries of my findings
`
`and opinions to assist me in testifying. Such exhibits have not yet been created.
`
`23.
`
`Further, I reserve the right to supplement or amend this report to address additional
`
`information or to respond to any additional opinions, analyses, or testimony
`
`presented by other witnesses.
`
`IV.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`24.
`
`It is my understanding that the litigation relates to Touchstream’s allegation that
`
`Google infringes three (3) United States patents (the “Patents-in-suit” and
`
`sometimes referred to herein as the “Touchstream patents”),7 which I have listed in
`
`Exhibit 3:
`
`• U.S. 8,356,251 (“the ’251 Patent”), entitled Play Control of Content on a
`
`Display Device,
`
`
`
`7 Complaint, ¶ 3.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`7
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 12 of 163
`
`
`
`• U.S. 8,782,528 (“the ’528 Patent”), entitled Play Control of Content on a
`
`Display Device,
`
`• U.S. 8,904,289 (“the ’289 Patent”), entitled Play Control of Content on a
`
`Display Device.
`
`25.
`
`It is my understanding that these patents are directed at “software that enables
`
`content to be wirelessly cast (e.g. accessed, displayed, and controlled) from a
`
`personal computer or mobile device to a second display screen or audio device (e.g.
`
`TV, computer monitor, tablet, speaker, etc.).”8
`
`The ’251 Patent
`
`26.
`
`It is my understanding that the ’251 Patent relates to improvements to the manner
`
`in which a user can present and control the playing of content on a display device,
`
`and that the patent covers systems and methods for controlling content on a display
`
`device by using a personal computing device, such as a smartphone, by way of
`
`server system.9 It is my understanding that the systems and methods described in
`
`the patent also can be used by a content provider that may want to deliver its media
`
`on-line.10
`
`The ’528 Patent
`
`27.
`
`The ’528 Patent is a continuation of the patent application that became the ’251
`
`Patent, and it shares the same specification.11
`
`
`
`8 Complaint, ¶ 32.
`9 U.S. Patent 8,356,251 (the ’251 Patent) at Abstract; conversations with Dr. Kevin Almeroth, September 23, 2022 and
`October 28, 2022.
`10 The ’251 Patent, 9:24-26.
`11 Conversations with Dr. Kevin Almeroth, September 23, 2022 and October 28, 2022.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`8
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 13 of 163
`
`
`
`The ’289 Patent
`
`28.
`
`The ’289 patent is also a system for presenting and controlling content on a display
`
`device, and it is in the same patent family as the ’251 Patent and the ’528 Patent.12
`
`V.
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE PARTIES, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES
`
`29.
`
`I may provide testimony about IP license agreements, patent license agreements,
`
`patent sublicense agreements,
`
`technology development agreements, and
`
`collaboration agreements, generally, including some of the reasons that parties
`
`commonly enter into such agreements. I may also provide testimony about some of
`
`the features of such agreements and terms commonly used in the profession.
`
`30.
`
`I may also provide testimony about the factors that are typically considered in
`
`negotiations for patent licenses, including factors that would be expected to be
`
`considered in connection with sublicenses and development agreements.
`
`31.
`
`I may provide testimony about best practices associated with patent or IP licenses
`
`and sublicenses, as well as commercial or industry practices and customs.
`
`32.
`
`I may also provide testimony about best practices in licensing transactions along
`
`with various approaches that licensors may apply to licensing negotiations and how
`
`certain terms in licensing agreements are commonly addressed.
`
`33.
`
`I am prepared to discuss certain aspects of the Parties’ businesses, their technology
`
`development and partnership agreements, and their sales and royalty provisions that
`
`supply pertinent context for my opinions.
`
`
`12 Conversations with Dr. Kevin Almeroth, September 23, 2022 and October 28, 2022.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`9
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 14 of 163
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Relevant Entities
`
`34.
`
`If asked, I may provide background testimony regarding the parties and technology
`
`relevant to licenses and sublicenses under the Patents-in-suit, including testimony
`
`regarding pertinent aspects of the parties’ businesses, technological developments,
`
`IP, and IP licensing practices.
`
`i. Touchstream Technologies, Inc.
`
`35.
`
`David Strober, the inventor of the Touchstream patents and original founder of
`
`Touchstream Technologies, Inc. (d/b/a Shodogg), perceived the need to shift videos
`
`from smaller devices (like smartphones) and “move” them to larger screens (like a
`
`computer monitor or TV), in mid-2010 while he was working at Westchester
`
`Community College in Valhalla, New York as a Program Manager and e-learning
`
`instructional designer. 13 Near the end of 2010, Mr. Strober had developed a
`
`working prototype that demonstrated his groundbreaking concept.
`
`36. Mr. Strober filed for his first patent application directed at this concept on August
`
`21, 2011, U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/477988.14 All three of the
`
`Touchstream patents are titled “Play Control of Content on a Display Device” and
`
`claim priority to this Provisional Patent Application.15 The ’251 patent was issued
`
`by the USPTO on January 15, 2013.16 The ’528 patent was issued by the USPTO
`
`
`
`13 Complaint, ¶¶ 21-22.
`14 Complaint, ¶¶ 22-23.
`15 Complaint, ¶ 23.
`16 The ’251 Patent.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`10
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 15 of 163
`
`
`
`on July 15, 2014.17 The ’289 patent was issued by the USPTO on December 2,
`
`2014.18
`
`37.
`
`Since being founded in 2011 by Mr. Strober, Touchstream has been a leader in
`
`developing casting technology and is headquartered in New York, NY. 19
`
`Touchstream developed software that enables consumers to wirelessly cast (e.g.,
`
`access, display, and control) videos from smartphones to any Internet connected
`
`display or audio device, organize and manage entertainment, and share video,
`
`music, and social activities with friends.20
`
`38.
`
`Touchstream first made its technology public at VentureBeat’s DEMO event in
`
`October 2011.21 Touchstream highlighted that their technology was patent pending
`
`on their Shodogg website and was featured in several online articles in 2011 that
`
`also included statements about the patent status of Touchstream’s technology.22
`
`Touchstream formally launched its platform on January 10, 2012, at CES 2012.23
`
`
`17 U.S. Patent 8,782,528 (the ’528 Patent).
`18 U.S. Patent 8,904,289 (the ’289 Patent).
`19 Complaint, ¶¶ 30-32.
`20 “Touchstream Technologies,” CB Insights, https://www.cbinsights.com/company/touchstream-technologies;
`Complaint, ¶ 32.
`21 “Drinks and Pitches Flowed Freely at DEMO and VentureBeat’s First New York City Startup Party,” VentureBeat,
`October 27, 2011, https://venturebeat.com/business/venturebeat-party-new-york/.
`22 “Shodogg will let you pause and restart video from any device (exclusive),” VentureBeat, December 14, 2011,
`https://venturebeat.com/media/shodogg-video-sharing-phones-tvs-exclusive/; “Drinks and pitches flowed freely at
`DEMO and VentureBeat’s first New York City startup party,” Beat, October 27, 2011,
`https://venturebeat.com/business/venturebeat-party-new-york/; “Shodogg,” Shodogg, October, 3, 2011,
`https://web.archive.org/web/20111003131546/http://shodogg.com/.
`23 “Shodogg™ Launches at CES and Transforms Streaming Video Delivery by Fueling Industry Expansion with Content
`Providers,” PR News Wire, January 10, 2012, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shodogg-launches-at-ces-
`and-transforms-streaming-video-delivery-by-fueling-industry-expansion-with-content-providers-137010098.html.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`11
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 16 of 163
`
`
`
`39.
`
`Touchstream and its technology have won several awards. In 2011, Touchstream
`
`won the 2011 Mobile Excellence Award for Best Delivery Platform.24 In 2014,
`
`Touchstream won the Techweek NYC Launch Competition in 2014.25
`
`ii. Google LLC
`
`40.
`
`Google LLC is a multi-billion dollar global technology company headquartered in
`
`Mountain View, California. 26 Google was founded in September 1998 by Sergey
`
`Brin and Larry Page, initially dubbing it “Backrub”, which was later changed to
`
`Google and incorporated as Google Inc.27 Google restructured in 2015, forming
`
`Alphabet Inc., a technology conglomerate holding company with Google LLC,
`
`Fiber, Nest, Google X, Google Ventures, and other subsidiaries.28
`
`41.
`
`Google has developed a range of products in search engine technology, online
`
`advertising, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-
`
`commerce, artificial intelligence, and consumer electronics fields. In 2000, Google
`
`began selling advertising through Google AdWords. In 2004, Google launched
`
`Gmail, an ad-supported webmail service that would eventually integrate Google’s
`
`online productivity suite called Google Docs. In 2005, Google launched Google
`
`Maps and purchased the mobile phone software company, Android, for $50 million.
`
`
`24 “Shodogg™ Launches at CES and Transforms Streaming Video Delivery by Fueling Industry Expansion with Content
`Providers,” PR News Wire, January 10, 2012, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shodogg-launches-at-ces-
`and-transforms-streaming-video-delivery-by-fueling-industry-expansion-with-content-providers-137010098.html.
`25 “Meet Shodogg Who Won this Year’s Techweek NYC Launch Competition,” AlleyWatch, December 4, 2014,
`https://web.archive.org/web/20150113004601/https://www.alleywatch.com/2014/12/meet-shodogg-who-won-this-years-
`techweek-nyc-launch-competition/.
`26 Google Inc., 10-K Form, 2012, p 3.
`27 “Google’s Incredible Growth: A Timeline,” CNN, https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/12/business/google-history-
`timeline/index.html.
`28 “Meet Google Alphabet – Google’s new parent company,” CNN Business, August 11, 2015,
`https://money.cnn.com/2015/08/10/technology/alphabet-google/index.html.
`
`EXPERT REPORT
`OF MARK J. CHANDLER
`
`12
`
` CONFIDENTIAL
`
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 185-5 Filed 01/19/23 Page 17 of 163
`
`
`
`In 2006, Google purchased YouTube for $1.65 billion in stock. Google launched
`
`their browser, Chrome, in 2008. In 2010, Google partnered with HTC and T-Mobile
`
`to launch their first mobile phone, the Nexus One.29
`
`42.
`
`Google’s business is focused around several key areas consisting of search,
`
`advertising, operating systems and platforms, enterprise, and hardware products.30
`
`Despite the wide range of products and services, the majority of Google’s revenue
`
`is in online advertising. In 2020, Alphabet generated almost $183 billion in revenue,
`
`with $147 billion, over 80% of which was attributable to Google’s advertising
`
`business.31
`
`43.
`
`YouTube is an online video sharing and social media platform that was founded on
`
`February 14, 2005, and acquired by Google Inc. on October 9, 2006 for $1.65
`
`billion. 32 YouTube’s primary source of revenue is advertising, with additional
`
`revenue generated from, among other things, subscription services from YouTube
`
`Premium and YouTube TV.33 YouTube’s advertising revenue increased from $8
`
`billion in 2017 to $29 billion in 2021.34
`
`
`29 “Google reveals Nexus One for T-Mobile, Verizon: $529 contract-free,” Apple Insider, January 5, 2010,
`https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/01/05/google_reveals_nexus_one_for_t_mobile_verizon_529_contract_free.
`30 Google Inc., 10-K Form, 20