Dolby sues Adobe for dodging license fees

Copyright case puts royalty model under the microscope


Updated Audio specialist Dolby Labs is suing Adobe for copyright violation as the two companies sit at odds over licensing payments.

A complaint [PDF] filed with the Northern California District Court accuses Adobe of violating its copyright on nine different media encoders and software routines. The complaint also alleges breach of contract, breach of warranty, and assertion of audit rights.

The way Dolby tells it (Adobe did not respond to a request for comment), the entire matter goes back to 2012, when Adobe was in the midst of a shift from media-based software to its Creative Cloud service, leading the two companies to re-negotiate a deal that previously calculated a license fee for each disc sold.

At the time, the two companies agreed to calculate the licensing costs Adobe paid to Dolby for using its audio encoders and other tools based on the daily average number of subscribers to the service.

Normally, Dolby says, it lets companies self-report the sales figures they use to calculate Dolby license payments. To keep them honest, the company occasionally sends in a third-party auditor to check the customer's books and make sure they aren't under-reporting.

In 2015, Dolby tried to do just that with Adobe, asking to see figures on the subscriber rates for Creative Cloud from 2012-2014. Instead, Adobe offered the auditors access to figures it used for its quarterly financial reports.

"An audit consisting only of reviewing what was previously reported is, of course, no audit at all," the suit claims.

"The entire point of an audit is to verify the accuracy of the prior representations of Adobe about what was or was not a royalty-bearing “Sale” of Adobe’s various products that contain Dolby Technologies."

At the same time, Dolby charges, Adobe execs were trying to negotiate with Dolby on a new licensing deal for its cloud services, stalling with the audit request in order to keep Dolby in the dark until late 2017.

"Dolby thereby learned that Adobe’s representations and assurances were not true and that Adobe would not comply with its audit obligations," Dolby claims.

"In fact, on information and belief, Adobe had never intended to provide Dolby with complete information sufficient for Dolby to conduct a meaningful audit of Adobe’s books and records."

Now, Dolby is calling in the lawyers, asking the court to find Adobe in violation of the deal. In addition to the usual damages and legal costs, Dolby is also asking the court to force Adobe to submit to the audit so that the licensing costs can be figured out once and for all. ®

Updated to add

Adobe has sent us the following statement on the matter:

While Adobe does not comment on the details of any pending litigation, Adobe does not agree with Dolby’s characterization of the issues concerning its audit of Adobe’s past use of its software, as disclosed in its complaint.

Narrower topics


Other stories you might like

  • Adobe apologizes for repeated outages of its Creative Cloud video collaboration service
    Frame.io admits it was 'slow to scale as demand rose

    Adobe-owned cloudy video workflow outfit Frame.io has apologized and promised to do better after a series of lengthy outages to its service, which became part of Adobe's flagship Creative Cloud in 2021.

    Frame.io bills itself as "The fastest, easiest, and most secure way to automatically get footage from cameras to collaborators – anywhere in the world" because its "Camera to Cloud" approach "eliminates the delay between production and post" by uploading audio and video "from the set to Frame.io between each take." In theory, that means all the creatives involved in filmed projects don't have to wait before getting to work.

    In theory. Customers say that's not the current Frame.io experience. Downdetector's listing for the site records plenty of complaints about outages and tweets like the one below are not hard to find.

    Continue reading
  • DMCA can't be used to sidestep First Amendment, court rules
    Anonymous speech protections apply online too, and copyright can't diminish that

    It's been a good week for free speech advocates as a judge ruled that copyright law cannot be used to circumvent First Amendment anonymity protections.

    The decision from the US District Court for the Northern District of California overturns a previous ruling that compelled Twitter to unmask an anonymous user accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). 

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which filed a joint amicus brief with the ACLU in support of Twitter's position, said the ruling confirms "that copyright holders issuing subpoenas under the DMCA must still meet the Constitution's test before identifying anonymous speakers." 

    Continue reading
  • Adobe lowers 2022 forecast, blames Ukraine war, strong dollar
    Extended 'summer season' also at fault, says software slinger as share price slides

    Creative software slinger Adobe booked in double-digit revenues rises in its latest quarter but lowered forecasts due to conflict in Ukraine and and currency challenges. As such, Wall Street frowned and the share price went down.

    The Photoshop maker reported turnover from sales of $4.39 billion for Q2 ended June 3, up 14 percent year-on-year. The vast bulk of this, some $4.07 billion, was subscription-based, something other software vendors must eye with some envy because investors love recurring revenues.

    The Digital Media division, which includes Creative Cloud and Document Cloud products, jumped 15 percent to $3.20 billion, higher than analysts had estimated. The Digital Experience wing was $1.1bn, up 17 per cent, again trumping analysts' projections of $1.08 billion.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022