Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 1 of 17

1 Frank E. Scherkenbach (SBN 142549 / [email protected]) Adam J. Kessel (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) 2 Proshanto Mukherji (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) Jeffrey Shneidman (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) 3 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 4 One Marina Park Drive Boston, MA 02210 5 Telephone: (617) 542-5070 Facsimile: (617) 542-8906 6 Michael R. Headley (SBN 220834 / [email protected]) 7 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 8 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 9 Telephone: (650) 839-5070 Facsimile: (650) 839-5071 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 BYTEDANCE INC., TIKTOK INC., and TIKTOK PTE. LTD. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

14 Case No. 3:20-cv-7572-TSH 15 16 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR BYTEDANCE INC., TIKTOK INC., AND 17 TIKTOK PTE. LTD. (1) DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. 18 Plaintiffs PATENT NO. 9,691,429

19 v. (2) INJUNCTION AGAINST TO 20 CEASE INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. TRILLER, INC. PATENT NOS. 9,648,132, 9,992,322, & 21 9,294,430 Defendant. 22 (3) DAMAGES FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT 23

24 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 25 26 Plaintiffs Bytedance Inc. (“BDI”), TikTok Inc. (“TTI”), and TikTok Pte. Ltd. (“TTPL”) 27 (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) hereby bring this First Amended Complaint against Defendant Triller, 28 Inc. (“Triller” or “Defendant”) as follows: 1 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No 3:20-cv-07572-TSH.

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 2 of 17

1 NATURE OF ACTION 2 1. Plaintiffs BDI and TTI bring this action for a declaratory judgment of non- 3 infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,691,429 (“the ’429 patent”). Plaintiffs TTI and TTPL also seek 4 an injunction against Triller and damages for Triller’s past and ongoing infringement of U.S. Patent 5 Nos. 9,648,132 (“the ’132 patent”), 9,992,322 (“the ’322 patent”), and 9,294,430 (“the ’430 6 patent”). 7 2. Plaintiffs BDI and TTI seek a declaratory judgment that they do not infringe any 8 claim of the ’429 patent (attached as Exhibit A). Plaintiffs TTI and TTPL also seek remedies in

9 equity and law for Triller’s past and ongoing infringement of TikTok’s patented intellectual property 10 as set forth below. 11 3. Plaintiffs are technology companies that provide and support a variety of mobile 12 software applications that enable people around the world to connect with, consume, and create 13 entertainment content, including via an application called “TikTok.” TikTok is a mobile software 14 application that millions of Americans, including many in this judicial district, use to create and 15 share short videos composed of expressive content.

16 4. Defendant Triller is the developer, distributor, and operator of an application called 17 “Triller” which it characterizes as “an entertainment platform built for creators.”1 Defendant Triller 18 has alleged that TikTok infringes the ’429 patent, which is not correct. To the contrary, it is Triller 19 that improperly is infringing TTPL and TTI intellectual property, including by Triller’s past and 20 ongoing infringement of the ’132 patent, ’322 patent, and ’430 patent, which includes acts of 21 infringement in this judicial district.

22 Triller’s Accusations Against TikTok Are Without Merit 23 5. On July 29, 2020, Triller filed a lawsuit against the entities TikTok Inc. and 24 Bytedance Ltd. in the Western District of Texas (C.A. No. 20-cv-00693) (“the Texas Litigation”) 25 alleging that those entities “directly and indirectly infringe the [’429] Patent by making, using, 26 offering for sale, selling, and importing the popular iOS and Android software application known

27 1 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/triller-social-video-platform/id994905763 (accessed Oct. 27, 28 2020). 2 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 3 of 17

1 as ‘TikTok.’” Id., Dkt. No. 1 ¶3. Triller has alleged that the “Accused Products” in that lawsuit (the

2 “Accused TikTok Products”) are “software products [that] are available for iOS and Android hand- 3 held or tablet devices and are distributed under the TikTok brand name.” Id., ¶14. Triller has alleged 4 that “making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing the Accused Products” constitutes 5 patent infringement and violates at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), (b), and (c). Id. ¶34 et seq. Triller has 6 also alleged that various training videos, demonstrations, brochures, and user guides, which are 7 created by BDI or TTI, instruct users of the TikTok apps to infringe the ’429 patent. Id. Triller has 8 alleged that making the Accused TikTok Products (among other acts) infringes at least claims 1, 3,

9 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the ’429 patent. Id. 10 6. Notwithstanding Triller’s allegations in the Texas Litigation, that district is not a 11 proper forum for a dispute concerning the Accused TikTok Products. Bytedance Ltd., a defendant 12 in that case, is a holding company based outside of the United States that does not have employees 13 or property in Texas. TTI, the other defendant in that case, has no employees or facilities in the State 14 of Texas and, more specifically, does not have any regular and established place of business in that 15 forum, and thus is not subject to venue under the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland LLC

16 v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 581 U.S. ___ , 137 S. Ct. 1514 (2017). BDI and TTI thus bring 17 the instant action seeking declaratory judgment in a proper forum—in the state where the relevant 18 parties are based, and in the judicial district where a substantial part of the events or omissions 19 giving rise to Triller’s alleged infringement claims have occurred and continue to occur. 20 7. BDI and TTI are the only companies based in the United States responsible for 21 developing, providing, and supporting the Accused TikTok Products. Triller’s actions and 22 allegations have created a real and immediate controversy between Triller, BDI, and TTI as to

23 whether the Accused TikTok Products infringe any claim of the ’429 patent. Triller’s lawsuit and 24 statements that “making” the Accused TikTok Products infringes the ’429 patent demonstrate that 25 it is highly likely that Defendant Triller will assert infringement against BDI in addition to its 26 previous allegations against TTI. In the meantime, the cloud of Triller’s allegations, including that 27 making the Accused TikTok Products infringes the ’429 patent, hangs over BDI and TTI. 28 3 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 4 of 17

1 8. As set forth herein, BDI and TTI do not infringe and have not infringed the ’429

2 patent. Therefore, an actual and justiciable controversy exists as to whether BDI and TTI’s Accused 3 TikTok Products infringe any claim of the ’429 patent. A judicial declaration is necessary to resolve 4 the real, immediate, and justiciable controversy concerning these issues and to determine the 5 respective rights of the parties regarding the ’429 patent. BDI and TTI respectfully seek a judicial 6 determination that the ’429 patent is not directly or indirectly infringed by BDI and TTI, including 7 by their products and/or services.

8 Triller Infringes TikTok’s Patents 9 9. Contrary to Triller’s assertions, it is Triller that is using TikTok’s innovative, 10 valuable, and patented functionality. Triller’s software application for the iOS and 11 Triller’s software application for the Android operating system (collectively, the “Infringing Triller 12 Products”) infringe several TikTok patents, including the ’132 patent, ’322 patent, and ’430 patent, 13 which are owned by TTPL and exclusively licensed to TTI in the United States. The inventions 14 claimed and disclosed in TTPL’s multiple patents go to the heart of the Infringing Triller Products. 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 25 TikTok Triller 26 10. For example, the ’132 patent, ’322 patent, and ’430 patent are each titled “Method 27 of enabling digital music content to be downloaded to and used on a portable wireless computing 28 4 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 5 of 17

1 device.” These patents claim a priority date of 2006, which predates the founding of Triller by nearly

2 a decade. 3 11. For example, TikTok owns—and Triller infringes—the invention claimed in claim 4 30 of the ’322 patent, i.e., a “software application [that] is executable on a smartphone device … (a) 5 in which the software application allows the end-user to, over a wireless connection, create on a 6 remote server one or more user accounts with associated profiles for that end-user, wherein the 7 profiles are editable; and (b) the software application allows the end-user to, over the wireless 8 connection, view profiles created by other users of a service; and (c) the software application allows

9 the end-user to, over the wireless connection, interact with other users of the service; and (d) the 10 software application allows the end-user to, over the wireless connection, send and receive messages 11 to and from other users of the service; and (e) the software application allows the end-user to, over 12 the wireless connection, link his or her user account on the remote server to user accounts on the 13 remote server of other users of the same service or of other services.” 14 12. As a further example, TikTok owns—and Triller infringes—the invention claimed 15 in claim 35 of the ’322 patent, where that “software application is a music application wherein the

16 software application uses track -data that is formed as a separate meta-data layer and defines 17 attributes of tracks, the meta-data being external to a music track to make sharing and browsing of 18 track information possible without needing to distribute the related music track files.” 19 13. As a still further example, TikTok owns—and Triller infringes—the invention 20 claimed in claim 51 of the ’322 patent, where “the software application [is] such that the service 21 provides over a wireless connection, recommendations to the user of people, media content or any 22 other items which the user might like, based on the user’s viewing … history, on the viewing …

23 history of any other users or on any other criteria.” 24 14. As their titles suggest, TikTok’s other patents asserted in this litigation, specifically 25 the ’132 and ’420 patents, cover other aspects of “enabling digital music content to be downloaded 26 to and used on a portable wireless computing device,” which is critical functionality to Triller. 27 15. As set forth herein, Triller has illegally practiced, and continues to practice and 28 infringe claims of the ’132, ’332, and ’430 patents, all in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. 5 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 6 of 17

1 PARTIES 2 16. Plaintiff BDI is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 250 3 Bryant Street, Mountain View, California, 94041. 4 17. Plaintiff TTI is a California corporation having its principal place of business at 5800 5 Bristol Parkway, Culver City, California, 90230. 6 18. Plaintiff TTPL is a Singapore Corporation having its principal place of business at 8 7 Marina View Level 43 Asia Square Tower 1, Singapore, 018960. 8 19. On information and belief, and based on its allegations in the Texas Litigation,

9 Defendant Triller, Inc. is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 2121 10 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2320, Los Angeles, California, 90067. 11 20. On information and belief, and based on its allegations in the Texas Litigation, Triller 12 is the owner of the ’429 patent.

13 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 14 Subject Matter Jurisdiction 15 21. This action arises under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. and the Declaratory

16 Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims 17 alleged in this action at least pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338, 2201, and 2202. 18 22. This Court can provide the declaratory relief sought in this Complaint because an 19 actual case and controversy exists between the parties within the scope of this Court’s jurisdiction 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, at least because Triller has accused the Accused TikTok Products of 21 infringing its patent, e.g., by suing TTI as well as others for patent infringement alleging 22 infringement by “making” the Accused TikTok Products.

23 23. Plaintiff BDI makes the Accused TikTok Products that Triller alleges infringe, and 24 thus, BDI, in addition to TTI, should be the subject of Triller’s allegations. Triller has also alleged 25 that “portions of the Accused [TikTok] Products” are “especially made or adapted for use in 26 infringement of the ’429 Patent, and … [are] not suitable for substantial non-infringing use.” See 27 Texas Litigation Dkt. No. 1 ¶36, which implies that TTI and BDI’s roles in the development of those 28 products is an act of contributory infringement. Triller’s allegations against TTI and users of the 6 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 7 of 17

1 Accused TikTok Products cast a cloud over TTI and BDI’s business, causing uncertainty for TTI

2 and BDI, regarding the ongoing provision or use of the Accused TikTok Products. 3 24. Triller has maintained this charge despite the fact that the Accused TikTok Products 4 (and use thereof) do not in fact infringe, and have not infringed, any claims of the ’429 patent. 5 Triller’s allegations and actions have created a real, live, immediate, and justiciable case or 6 controversy between Triller, TTI, and BDI. 7 Personal Jurisdiction 8 25. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Triller. Triller’s principal place of business

9 is in California. Triller’s Terms of Service state that “Triller, Inc.[’s] address is at 2121 Avenue of 10 the Stars Suite 2350, Los Angeles, California 90067.” See Exhibit B. 11 26. Triller also lists both Los Angeles and San Francisco among the locations of its 12 worldwide offices on its website, including at https://www.triller.co/faq/index.html: 13 14

15

16 27. Moreover, Triller has purposefully directed its activities toward and engaged in 17 numerous specific contacts within this District, including by soliciting and providing goods and 18 services to people in this District (in the form of Triller’s own Infringing Triller Products), and by 19 soliciting investment and receiving funding from persons in this District to fund the creation, use, 20 sale, and distribution of Triller’s Infringing Products. On information and belief, Triller also uses, 21 sells, or otherwise provides Triller’s Infringing Products to a number of end users in this District, 22 including end users who post and view videos located in this District, as shown in the exemplary

23 screenshots below. On information and belief, Triller also induces and contributes to infringement 24 by at least the end users of Triller’s Infringing Products in this District, including end users who 25 post and view videos located in this district as shown in the exemplary screen shots below. 26 27 28 7 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 8 of 17

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9 10 11

12 28. Triller has also purposefully directed its conduct at this District with its attempt to 13 enforce the ’429 patent by making accusations of infringement against the Accused TikTok 14 Products, which are made in this District. 15 Venue

16 29. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400 including because 17 a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim presented in this Complaint occurred in this 18 District (see 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2)). For example, BDI makes the TikTok Accused Products in this 19 District. Venue is also proper in this district because Triller’s principal place of business is in

20 California, and Triller “resides” in this District under Federal venue laws because it is subject to 21 personal jurisdiction in this district (see 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2) & (d)). Venue is also proper in this 22 District because, on information and belief, Triller has committed acts of infringement in this

23 District, and Triller has a regular and established place of business in this District. For example, as 24 noted above at ¶26, Triller identifies San Francisco as an office location on its website. 25 30. In addition, the TikTok Accused Products and Triller’s Infringing Products are 26 distributed to users in the United States through Apple’s App Store and Google Play, both of which 27 are run by companies with principal places of business in California and more specifically in this 28 8 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 9 of 17

1 judicial District. Apple’s principal place of business is in Cupertino, California, and Google’s

2 principal place of business is in Mountain View, California. 3 CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 4 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF – 5 Declaratory Judgment of Noninfringement of the ’429 Patent

6 31. Plaintiffs BDI and TTI (the “Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs”) incorporate the 7 allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-30 as though fully set forth herein. 8 32. Neither the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs nor their products have infringed, 9 induced others to infringe, or contributed to infringement by others of, any claim of the ’429 patent. 10 Nor do any end-users of the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ products infringe any such claim. 11 33. By way of example, neither the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs nor their products 12 infringe, induce others to infringe, or contribute to any infringement by others of, claims 1-10 of the 13 ’429 patent, at least because the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs and their products do not perform 14 the method steps of “capturing a plurality of video takes” or “synchronizing each video take of the 15 plurality of captured video takes with the selected audio track while each video take of the plurality 16 of video takes is being captured, wherein synchronizing further comprises playing, from a first 17 beginning, the selected audio track at substantially the same time as a second beginning of capturing 18 each video take of the plurality of video takes.” Nor do any end-users of the Declaratory Judgment 19 Plaintiffs’ products perform this method step. This is at least because the Accused TikTok Products 20 do not provide a second “take,” meaning that the Accused TikTok products do not and cannot 21 perform the method steps requiring a “plurality of captured video takes” or “plurality of video 22 takes.” 23 34. By way of further example, the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ products do not 24 infringe, induce others to infringe, or contribute to any infringement by others of, claims 11-16 of 25 the ’429 patent, at least because their products are not a “user device, comprising … at least one 26 processor operable to: … synchronize each video take of the plurality of captured video takes to the 27 recorded audio track as each video take of the plurality of video takes is being captured, wherein 28 9 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 10 of 17

1 synchronizing further comprises playing, from a first beginning, the selected audio track at

2 substantially the same time as a second beginning of capturing each video take of the plurality of 3 video takes.” Nor are the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ products installed or otherwise used by 4 end-users in a way that satisfies this claim limitation. This is at least because the Accused TikTok 5 Products do not provide a second “take,” meaning that the Accused TikTok products do not 6 comprise a user device with at least one processor operable to “synchronize each video take of the 7 plurality of captured video takes” or “plurality of video takes” in the manner claimed. 8 35. By way of example, neither the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs nor their products

9 infringe, induce others to infringe, or contribute to any infringement by others of, claims 17-19 of 10 the ’429 patent, at least because the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs and their products do not 11 perform the method steps of “capturing a plurality of video takes” or “synchronizing, while the 12 plurality of video takes are being captured, each video take of the plurality of captured video takes 13 to the selected audio track, wherein synchronizing further comprises playing, from a first beginning, 14 the selected audio track at substantially the same time as a second beginning of capturing each video 15 take of the plurality of video takes; and creating a music video comprising the selected audio track

16 and at least a subset of the plurality of captured video takes synchronized to the selected audio track; 17 wherein creating comprises: displaying the subset of the plurality of captured video takes based on 18 the number of faces determined to be within each video take.” Nor do any end-users of the 19 Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ products perform this method step. This is at least because the 20 Accused TikTok Products do not provide a second “take,” meaning that the Accused TikTok 21 products do not and cannot perform the method steps requiring a “plurality of captured video takes” 22 or “plurality of video takes.”

23 36. As a result of the acts described in the foregoing paragraphs, there exists a definite 24 and concrete, real and substantial, justiciable controversy between Triller and the Declaratory 25 Judgment Plaintiffs regarding the noninfringement of the ’429 patent, including with respect to the 26 Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ Accused TikTok Products. This controversy is of sufficient 27 immediacy and reality to warrant issuance of a Declaratory Judgment. 28 10 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 11 of 17

1 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF – Infringement of the ’132 Patent 2 37. TTPL and TTI incorporate the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-36 as though fully 3 set forth herein. 4 38. TTPL is the assignee of the ’132 patent (a true and accurate copy of which is attached 5 hereto as Exhibit C) and is the owner of all right, title, and interest in the ’132 patent, entitled 6 “Method of enabling digital music content to be downloaded to and used on a portable wireless 7 computing device.” TTI is the exclusive licensee of the ’132 patent in the United States and, as the 8 exclusive licensee, has the right to exclude Triller from practicing the ’132 patent. 9 39. The ’132 patent was duly and properly issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark 10 Office on May 9, 2017. 11 40. TTPL and TTI together have all rights to sue for and collect damages for past and 12 ongoing infringement of the ’132 patent, as well as the right to seek an injunction for infringement 13 of the ’132 patent. 14 41. Each claim of the ’132 patent is valid and enforceable. 15 42. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, Triller has directly infringed at least claim 31 of the 16 ’132 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, including by making, using, offering 17 for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States, at least the Infringing Triller Products. 18 Charts providing non-limiting exemplary evidence of this infringement, based solely on public 19 information after a reasonable investigation, are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit F-1. TTPL 20 and TTI reserve their rights to assert further infringement allegations, including, for example, on the 21 basis of information about the Infringing Triller Products that TTPL and TTI will obtain during 22 discovery. 23 43. Triller has also infringed at least claim 31 of the ’132 patent by inducing others, 24 including end users of the Infringing Triller Products, to infringe at least claim 31 of the ’132 patent. 25 On information and belief, Triller takes active steps to induce infringement of at least claim 31 of 26 the ’132 patent by others, including end users of the Infringing Triller Products, and Triller does so 27 knowing that those steps will induce, encourage and facilitate direct infringement by others. On 28 11 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 12 of 17

1 information and belief, Triller knows or should know that such activities induce others to directly

2 infringe at least claim 31 of the ’132 patent. 3 44. Triller also contributes to the infringement of at least claim 31 of the ’132 patent by 4 others, including end users of the Infringing Triller Products. Acts by Triller that contribute to the 5 infringement of others include, but are not limited to, the use, sale or provision of the Infringing 6 Triller Products to end users of the Infringing Triller Products. The Infringing Triller Products are 7 especially made or adapted for use to infringe at least claim 31 of the ’132 patent and are at least a 8 material part of those claims. The Infringing Triller Products, including the functionality

9 contributing to infringement of the ’132 patent, are not a staple article or commodity of commerce 10 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 11 45. By way of at least this Amended Complaint, Triller knows of the ’132 patent and 12 performs acts that Triller knows, or should know, induce, and/or contribute to the direct 13 infringement of the ’132 patent. 14 46. TTPL and TTI have been irreparably harmed by Triller’s infringement of the ’132 15 patent and will continue to be harmed unless and until Triller’s infringement is enjoined by this

16 Court. 17 47. Moreover, by its actions, Triller has injured TTPL and TTI and is liable to TTPL and 18 TTI for infringement of the ’132 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271. TTPL and TTI are entitled to 19 damages as set forth in at least 35 U.S.C. § 284. 20 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF – Infringement of the ’322 Patent 21 48. TTPL and TTI incorporate the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-47 as though fully 22 set forth herein. 23 49. TTPL is the assignee of the ’322 Patent (a true and accurate copy of which is attached 24 hereto as Exhibit D) and is the owner of all right, title, and interest in the ’322 patent, entitled 25 “Method of enabling digital music content to be downloaded to and used on a portable wireless 26 computing device.” TTI is the exclusive licensee of the ’322 patent in the United States and, as the 27 exclusive licensee, has the right to exclude Triller from practicing the ’322 patent. 28 12 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 13 of 17

1 50. The ’322 patent was duly and properly issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark

2 Office on June 5, 2018. 3 51. TTPL and TTI together have all rights to sue for and collect damages for past and 4 ongoing infringement of the ’322 patent, as well as the right to seek an injunction for infringement 5 of the ’322 patent. 6 52. Each claim of the ’322 patent is valid and enforceable. 7 53. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, Triller has directly infringed at least claim 30 of the 8 ’322 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, including by making, using, offering

9 for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States, at least the Infringing Triller Products. 10 Charts providing non-limiting exemplary evidence of this infringement, based solely on public 11 information after a reasonable investigation, are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit F-2. TTPL 12 and TTI reserve their rights to assert further infringement allegations, including, for example, on the 13 basis of information about the Infringing Triller Products that TTPL and TTI will obtain during 14 discovery. 15 54. Triller has also infringed at least claim 30 of the ’322 patent by inducing others,

16 including end users of the Infringing Trilling Products, to infringe at least claim 30 of the ’322 17 patent. On information and belief, Triller takes active steps to induce infringement of at least claim 18 30 of the ’322 patent by others, including end users of the Infringing Trilling Products, and Triller 19 does so knowing that those steps will induce, encourage and facilitate direct infringement by others. 20 On information and belief, Triller knows or should know that such activities induce others to directly 21 infringe at least claim 30 of the ’322 patent. 22 55. Triller also contributes to the infringement of at least claim 30 of the ’322 patent by

23 others, including end users of the Infringing Triller Products. Acts by Triller that contribute to the 24 infringement of others include, but are not limited to, the use, sale or provision of the Infringing 25 Triller Products to end users of the Infringing Triller Products. The Infringing Triller Products are 26 especially made or adapted for use to infringe at least claim 30 of the ’322 patent and are at least a 27 material part of those claims. The Infringing Triller Products, including the functionality 28 13 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 14 of 17

1 contributing to infringement of the ’322 patent, are not a staple article or commodity of commerce

2 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 3 56. By way of at least this Amended Complaint, Triller knows of the ’322 patent and 4 performs acts that Triller knows, or should know, induce, and/or contribute to the direct 5 infringement of the ’322 patent. 6 57. TTPL and TTI have been irreparably harmed by Triller’s infringement of the ’322 7 patent and will continue to be harmed unless and until Triller’s infringement is enjoined by this 8 Court.

9 58. Moreover, by its actions, Triller has injured TTPL and TTI and is liable to TTPL and 10 TTI for infringement of the ’322 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271. TTPL and TTI are entitled to 11 damages as set forth in at least 35 U.S.C. § 284. 12 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – Infringement of the ’430 Patent 13 59. TTPL and TTI incorporate the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-58 as though fully 14 set forth herein. 15 60. TTPL is the assignee of the ’430 patent (a true and accurate copy of which is attached 16 hereto as Exhibit E) and is the owner of all right, title, and interest in the ’430 patent, entitled 17 “Method of enabling digital music content to be downloaded to and used on a portable wireless 18 computing device.” TTI is the exclusive licensee of the ’430 patent in the United States and, as the 19 exclusive licensee, has the right to exclude Triller from practicing the ’430 patent. 20 61. The ’430 patent duly and properly issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 21 on March 22, 2016. 22 62. TTPL and TTI together have all rights to sue for and collect damages for past and 23 ongoing infringement of the ’430 patent, as well as the right to seek an injunction for infringement 24 of the ’430 patent. 25 63. Each claim of the ’430 patent is valid and enforceable. 26 64. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, Triller has directly infringed at least claim 28 of the 27 ’430 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, including by making, using, offering 28 14 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 15 of 17

1 for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States, at least the Infringing Triller Products.

2 Charts providing non-limiting exemplary evidence of this infringement, based solely on public 3 information after a reasonable investigation, are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit F-3. TTPL 4 and TTI reserve their rights to assert further infringement allegations, including, for example, on the 5 basis of information about the Infringing Triller Products that TTPL and TTI will obtain during 6 discovery. 7 65. Triller has also infringed at least claim 28 of the ’430 patent by inducing others, 8 including end users of the Infringing Triller Products, to infringe at least claim 28 of the ’430 patent.

9 On information and belief, Triller takes active steps to induce infringement of at least claim 28 of 10 the ’430 patent by others, including end users of the Infringing Triller Products, and Triller does so 11 knowing that those steps will induce, encourage and facilitate direct infringement by others. On 12 information and belief, Triller knows or should know that such activities induce others to directly 13 infringe at least claim 28 of the ’430 patent. 14 66. Triller also contributes to the infringement of at least claim 28 of the ’430 patent by 15 others, including end users of the Infringing Triller Products. Acts by Triller that contribute to the

16 infringement of others include, but are not limited to, the use, sale or provision of the Infringing 17 Triller Products to end users of the Infringing Triller Products. The Infringing Triller Products are 18 especially made or adapted for use to infringe at least claim 28 of the ’430 patent and are at least a 19 material part of those claims. The Infringing Triller Products, including the functionality 20 contributing to infringement of the ’430 patent, are not a staple article or commodity of commerce 21 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 22 67. By way of at least this Amended Complaint, Triller knows of the ’430 patent and

23 performs acts that Triller knows, or should know, induce, and/or contribute to the direct 24 infringement of the ’430 patent. 25 68. TTPL and TTI have been irreparably harmed by Triller’s infringement of the ’430 26 patent and will continue to be harmed unless and until Triller’s infringement is enjoined by this 27 Court. 28 15 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 16 of 17

1 69. Moreover, by its actions, Triller has injured TTPL and TTI and is liable to TTPL and

2 TTI for infringement of the ’430 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271. TTPL and TTI are entitled to 3 damages as set forth in at least 35 U.S.C. § 284.

4 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 5 70. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial 6 by jury on all issues triable to a jury.

7 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 8 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court to enter judgment in their favor 9 against Triller: 10 A. For judgment that the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs, the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ 11 products, and users of the Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs’ Products do not infringe and 12 have not infringed under 35 U.S.C. § 271 (or any subsection thereof) any claim of the ’429 13 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and that none of them are liable 14 for damages or injunctive relief based on any claim of the ’429 patent; 15 B. For judgment in favor of TTPL and TTI that Triller has infringed, induced others to infringe,

16 and/or contributorily infringed the ’132, ’322, and ’430 patents; 17 C. For an injunction against Triller to block Triller from practicing any claim of the ’132, ’322, 18 and ’430 patents; 19 D. For an award of damages sufficient to compensate TTPL and TTI for Triller’s infringement 20 of the ’132, ’322, and ’430 patents, including lost profits suffered by TTPL or TTI as a result 21 of Triller’s infringement, in an amount not less than a reasonable royalty; 22 E. For an award of pre- and post-judgment interest;

23 F. For costs and expenses in this action; 24 G. That Triller be ordered to provide an accounting for the damages resulting from the 25 infringement of the ’132, ’322, and ’430 patents, together with interest and costs, and all 26 other damages permitted by 35 U.S.C. § 284, including an accounting for infringing acts not 27 presented at trial and an award by the court for additional damages for any such infringing 28 acts; and 16 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH

Case 3:20-cv-07572-TSH Document 9 Filed 11/11/20 Page 17 of 17

1 H. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

2 3 Dated: November 11, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 4 By: /s/ Michael R. Headley Frank E. Scherkenbach 5 (SBN 142549 / [email protected]) Adam J. Kessel 6 (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) 7 Proshanto Mukherji (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) 8 Jeffrey Shneidman (pro hac vice application to be filed / [email protected]) 9 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. One Marina Park Drive 10 Boston, MA 02210 11 Telephone: (617) 542-5070 Facsimile: (617) 542-8906 12 Michael R. Headley (SBN 220834 / [email protected]) 13 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 14 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 15 Telephone: (650) 839-5070 Facsimile: (650) 839-5071 16 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 17 Bytedance Inc., TikTok Inc., and TikTok Pte. Ltd.

18

19 20 21 22

23 24 25 26 27 28 17 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:20-cv-07572-TSH