By Owen Wengerd on Saturday, February 21, 2009 12:52 AM

Autodesk unleashed a major barrage today in its ongoing lawsuit with Ebay seller Timothy Vernor. After settling some of Vernor's claims, Autodesk is turning its attention to the remaining issue of whether or not the sale of AutoCAD is actually a sale or a license. The final resolution of this question could send shockwaves through the entire software industry, so it's not surprising that Autodesk brought out the big guns: a declaration in support of Autodesk by intellectual property law expert Raymond T. Nimmer. Today's filings raise the stakes in this battle, so it will be interesting to see how Vernor responds.

By Owen Wengerd on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 12:27 AM

In a response to Autodesk's amended complaint, SolidWorks denies Autodesk's claims and makes a series of counterclaims based on it's assertion that Autodesk is using the lawsuit and its marketing muscle to stifle competition.

By Owen Wengerd on Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:38 AM

Autodesk has filed an amended complaint against SolidWorks. The amended complaint is an attempt to address the problems identified by the recent order on SolidWorks' motion to dismiss. Autodesk has substantially rewritten many parts of the complaint. The trade dress infringement claims have been narrowed, but they still appear to lack clear definition.

By Owen Wengerd on Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:52 AM

Just in time for Christmas, SolidWorks got a little bit of what it asked for, but Autodesk still gets a chance to correct some of the deficiencies in its claims. The judge's order signals a long process ultimately headed for a jury trial now scheduled for January 11, 2010.

By Owen Wengerd on Monday, December 08, 2008 10:03 PM

In a recent flurry of filings, Autodesk attacks SolidWorks' motion to dismiss charges, and SolidWorks counters. The legal soap opera reads like a "he said, she said" schoolyard argument, except with more at stake. In my reading of the documents, I felt that Autodesk spent a lot of time straining at gnats in the weaker parts of its argument (perhaps intent on maximizing the defense costs -- unlike its approach in the Vernor case, where it chose to settle its weakest arguments). So far, SolidWorks appears to be up to the challenge.

One thing that struck me is that Autodesk still refuses to state what exactly is false in SolidWorks' advertising claims. One might read into Autodesk's failure to address this and a few other specific challenges raised by SolidWorks that they are not primarily int ... Read More »

By Owen Wengerd on Friday, November 21, 2008 11:10 AM

In a filing last week, DS SolidWorks argues for dismissal of Autodesk's lawsuit. The documents filed with this motion to dismiss are voluminous, and include extensive citations to other cases. This indicates that SolidWorks has decided to invest the necessary resources to defend themselves.

SolidWorks claims that Autodesk is using this lawsuit to "bludgeon" SolidWorks and to achieve the results it was unable to achieve via the US Patent and Trademark Office. Their basic argument is that Autodesk does not own the "DWG" and "real" marks, therefore it has no standing to claim injury from SolidWorks' use of those terms. With regard to Autodesk's claims of unfair business practices and false advertising, SolidWorks argues that Autodesk has not stated why the statements are false, and that in any case the statements in question are not actionable because they are mere "puffery& ... Read More »

By Owen Wengerd on Monday, November 03, 2008 6:09 PM

According to a proposed settlement order filed on Friday, Autodesk and Tim Vernor have agreed to settle Vernor's "Second Claim" for unfair and deceptive practices. In the settlement, Vernor agrees to drop his demand for a declaratory judgement that Autodesk has no right to interfere with Vernor's sale of Autodesk software, and his demand for an injunction prohibiting Autodesk from further interference. In exchange, Autodesk agrees to pay actual and punitive damages, attorney's fees, and "such other relief as the Court finds appropriate".

Essentially Vernor got everything he wanted, as the court's previous order denying Autodesk's motion to dismiss is almost as good as an injunction. By settling this secondary claim for a relatively small amount, Autodesk can now focus its resources& ... Read More »

By Owen Wengerd on Thursday, October 23, 2008 5:26 PM

In an October 13 filing, DS SolidWorks exercised their right to have the case heard by a federal judge instead of a magistrate judge. Yesterday, the case was reassigned to Judge Willian H. Alsup.

By Owen Wengerd on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 2:05 AM

Since this web site has expanded to cover CAD industry litigation in general, I have added the recently filed Autodesk v. SolidWorks lawsuit to the docket history page. Over time I will get the Grapevine page updated with links to commentary about the suit.

By Owen Wengerd on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 12:53 AM

The original web site has expanded to cover CAD industry litigation in general, so the domain name was changed to reflect the change in content. The NewsFeed page RSS feed is available at http://www.cadcourt.com/NewsFeed.aspx?rssid=1, and you can view docket history for tracked cases by following the links on the Docket page.