SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC. SOFTWARE LAWSUITS — “THEY’RE BACK!”
I didn’t want to let this one slide. Remember the Siemens Industry Software Inc. lawsuits (where Siemens sued a number of engineers who used their NX software without a license)? Well, in February, 2022, they have filed their newest copyright Infringement lawsuit (this is the TENTH TIME they are suing), this time against 100 John Doe Defendants (here in our own Texas Southern District Court, no less).
Siemens Industry Software Inc. v. Does 1-100 (Case No. 4:22-cv-00588), filed in February, 2022.
I’ve already written all that needs to be known about the Siemens Industry Software Inc. lawsuits
Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >
What happened to the Siemens Industry Software Inc.’s older lawsuits?
In Wave 1, Siemens solicited licenses for their NX software. At first, we thought that these were bittorrent-based lawsuits like the others we have been dealing with, but then we learned that Siemens was actually tracking the unlicensed USE of the software (e.g., think “software phone home”).
This complicated the lawsuits because they were dealing with actual evidence (rather than the “snapshot bittorrent-based evidence” we have seen in the movie lawsuits). As a result, we put together a list of steps an attorney should take in defending a Siemens Industry Software Inc. lawsuit, and this has proven to be an effective strategy.
Over time, the lawsuit progressed, and eventually Siemens dismissed the lawsuit once they realized who they wanted to name and serve in their own lawsuits, and they filed individual copyright infringement lawsuits against companies they discovered were using their software without a license.
In Wave 2, Siemens filed a similar lawsuit, this time against 100 new defendants. They surprised a number of defendants with settlement numbers of $50,000+ (eventually, we learned that they were settling licenses to their software, and they actually cost that much). This second wave lawsuit “on the books” looked to be a failure because they missed a FRCP Rule 4(m) deadline to name and serve defendants. As a result, they dismissed the entire lawsuit, however, I know that they continued after the dismissal to contact accused defendants (or their attorneys) with the intention of having those accused defendants [now dismissed] purchase a license to cover their use of the Siemens Industry Software Inc. NX software.
WAVES 3-4 (2017 – mid-2018)
In Waves 3-4, Siemens continued to target engineers in their lawsuits. The purpose of these lawsuits was to “legitimize” those who were using their NX software “for profit.” They were more reasonable this time on the settlement amounts (no settlements, just purchase of software licenses), but they allowed the defendant some leeway in determining what software title would best benefit the user, and whether Mach 3 was needed, or whether a lower-cost alternative was an option. Siemens Industry Software Inc. also started to discuss settlement negotiations themselves (e.g., offering money to settle the claims), however, this never materialized.
WAVE 5 (late 2018)
Now in Wave 5, I do not yet know whether these 107 John Doe Defendants are from the same pool as the earlier lawsuits were filed, or whether these are from an entirely new pool of accused infringers. However, at least the lawsuit itself (its intentions, and what to expect) are less of a mystery, as we were able to settle a number of claims in their previous lawsuits through the purchase of a software license.
WAVES 6-8 (2019-2021):
In Wave 6-8 (2019-2021), Siemens Industry Software Inc. changed their strategy, attempting to streamline the settlement process. In previous cases, those that used the software for personal reasons (e.g., academic, training, 3D printing, designing private home uses, etc.) were considered “tinkerers.” In previous lawsuits, Siemens did not require this group of individuals to obtain a software license.
IN WAVES 6-8, *THIS CHANGED*. Siemens Industry Software Inc. asked most defendants to buy software to legitimize their use. The software did not need to be the same $30,000 NX software they used prior to being sued, but lesser versions with fewer features, or altogether other software packages [at a steep discount] were presented as options.
WAVE 9 (2021) followed the same trends as WAVE 8 (2020). The only difference is that the “tinkerer” category became relevant again. This does not mean that they did NOT ask defendants to purchase a piece of Siemens software (they did); however, their focus appeared to be on the engineers who were using their software in their own businesses for profit.
WAVE 10 (2022):
Now we are in Wave 10 (2022). In this wave, there is one lawsuit which has 100 John Doe Defendants. I do not yet know whether these 100 John Doe Defendants are from the same pool as the earlier lawsuits were filed, or whether these are from an entirely new pool of accused infringers. I suspect that the 100 defendants in the (4:22-cv-00588) case are all new defendants.
As always, here is how an attorney should be handling a Siemens Industry Software Inc. lawsuit, and how we at the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC would handle your Siemens Industry Software Inc. case. This has been an effective strategy in each of the various Siemens Industry Software lawsuits, and thus I am suggesting it again with this newest wave of lawsuits.
[CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the Siemens Industry Software Inc. software copyright case and options on how to proceed (even specifically for your circumstances), you can e-mail us at [email protected], you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your Siemens Industry Software case, or you can call us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].
CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.
NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together. That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.