Tag Archives: Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software

Siemens NX Lawsuit | Expecting FRCP Rule 4(m) Dismissal Due To a Missed Deadline

Siemens PLM v. Does 1-100 (TX) and missed deadlines.

As many of you know, our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC is representing a number of engineer clients who are accused in a Siemens NX lawsuit of using their Siemens NX Mach 3 software without a valid license.

Siemens as we know is using the lawsuit as a pretext to convert accused infringers into valid license holders.  The name of their lawsuit is the Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software, Inc. v. Does 1-100 (Case No. 4:16-cv-03552) case filed in the Texas Southern District Court.

The Siemens NX lawsuit attorneys just missed a deadline to name and serve defendants.

Procedurally, Siemens was under a FRCP Rule 4(m) deadline to name and serve defendants by 4/3/2017.  This deadline was set by the judge, and the judge is the one with the discretion on whether to extend it once, multiple times, or dismiss the lawsuit after a certain time period has elapsed.

As of writing this article, The Siemens NX lawsuit attorneys did not file anything on 4/3, and their deadline has passed.  Further, it has been two days without any activity on the court docket from Siemens NX.  This is not surprising, as copyright cases often miss a deadline such as this, and then they request an extension and the federal judges readily approve them, sometimes weeks later.

What a dismissal means to your case, and how you should proceed depending on your circumstances.

A dismissal of the Siemens NX lawsuit means that you are no longer a John Doe in the case.  However, whether this matter is over or not is based on whether you are before or after the ISP handed out your information in compliance with the subpoena.

If the ISP has not yet complied with the subpoena, your contact information is still hidden from the Siemens lawsuit attorney.

If you are before the due date that your ISP gave you before they comply with the subpoena, you are in luck.  At this point, you are still anonymous, and if you hired an attorney, your attorney will likely offer to return the money you paid to him.  It would benefit you to have him contact the ISP to notify them that the Siemens NX lawsuit has been dismissed and that they should not comply with the Siemens subpoena.

By having the ISP agree not to comply with the subpoena sent to them by the Siemens NX lawsuit attorneys (Robert Riddle & Andrew Bluebond), you will remain anonymous, and your Siemens NX lawsuit plaintiff attorneys will never learn who you are.

If the ISP has already complied with the subpoena, your contact information has been shared with the Siemens NX lawsuit plaintiff attorneys.

If the ISP date has already passed, the assumption is that the ISP already complied with the subpoena, as they told you they would.  Here, you are no longer anonymous, and the plaintiff attorney already knows who you are.

How the 3-Year statute of limitations for copyright infringement cases suddenly becomes relevant.

A dismissal at this point is inconsequential because the plaintiff attorney has already acquired the information he needs to proceed against you out of court.  The statute of limitations to sue someone for copyright infringement is three years from the alleged date of infringement.  That means that they have three years to sue you as a defendant in a copyright infringement case for this same claim*.

*NOTE: There is more on this topic, but it is outside the scope of this article.

Whether your plaintiff attorney is a ‘copyright troll’ or now also becomes relevant.

Depending on whether your copyright holder is a ‘copyright troll’ (meaning that they will just file another lawsuit against a new set of John Doe Defendants), or whether they will continue to pursue claims against you out of court (using the information they obtained from this lawsuit), you have two options on how to proceed.

If the copyright holder is a copyright troll, a dismissal such as this one should give you reason to celebrate.  However, Siemens PLM is not a typical copyright troll, and that is why I wrote this article.

To a Siemens PLM attorney, you are worth $30K-$60K.

Each settlement in a Siemens case is worth $30K-$60K for Siemens.  The goal of the Siemens attorney is to contact defendants to arrange for a purchase of one or more NX Mach 3 “seats” or “licenses” (at roughly $30K/seat).

An engineer who has been caught using the software without a license, and who faces an ongoing $150,000 lawsuit is an easy candidate for Siemens to convert into a paying customer.  This can be done with or without a lawsuit being in play, at it would apply regardless of whether the judge dismissed the underlying lawsuit for missing the FRCP Rule 4(m) deadline, or whether they tire of being monitored by a judge and they dismiss the lawsuit themselves.

After all, they already have the information they need, and they have three years to continue contacting defendants until such a time when they are no longer able to proceed (or until the Siemens clients stops paying their fees).

In sum, the case is NOT yet dismissed.

The Siemens PLM v. Does 1-100 Texas case is not yet dismissed, although I wanted to have this information ready for you so that you will be prepared with your options should a dismissal happen.

 Discuss your Siemens PLM Case With a Cashman Law Firm Attorney


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.  Also, the contents of topics discussed on this site are not meant to be considered legal advice to act upon or not act upon.  Contact your attorney for answers specific to your particular circumstance.

Siemens Surprises John Does With $50K+ Settlement Requests

UPDATE: I have done further searching, and it appears as if the prices that Siemens PLM is asking for is shockingly accurate.  They appear to be asking from John Doe Defendants the cost of 1-2 business licenses for their NX software, which can be as high as $30,000 per license.  So while for an average internet user spending $30,000 on a piece of software would be obscene, apparently this is what people are paying for this software.  This does not mean that there is no room for negotiation — circumstances as to whether or how the use happened differs for every defendant, and every John Doe Defendant has a different financial situation and personal circumstances.

It usually makes no sense writing about cases once they have progressed quite a bit, but with the Siemens PLM cases, Siemens has ramped up their sales tactics in a way which needs some explaining.

Recent letters that have gone out from Andrew Bluebond of Reed Smith LLP are asking for numbers in excess of “$50,000, plus any applicable sales taxes, legal fees and expenses, to license [to accused defendant]” (emphasis added).  Thus, a Siemens settlement could end up being $55,000 – $60,000 (or more) just for using the software without a license.

I have not yet figured out how they have come to this large number, because each defendant only has a limited number of “infringing uses” of Siemens PLM’s NX software.

WHY HIRING AN ATTORNEY AT THIS LATE STAGE OF THE LAWSUIT IS A GOOD IDEA.

Initially, I stopped taking clients for this case in February, but because no doubt people are being hit with these high numbers (this was an unexpected turn for Siemens), it makes sense to have us represent you to negotiate a settlement price this high down to something that is in more of a “fair” price range.  And yes, I am willing to take on a limited number of new clients simply because Siemens is suing in my state, and I can easily appear and represent clients in the Texas Southern District Court should negotiations go awry.  Also, I am already spending the time to research the cases and review the evidence they have against each John Doe Defendant, so I have already done much of the legwork (which you will not need to pay me for).

It also must be noted that at this price point, it simply makes sense to fight the case in court (especially if you did not use the software).  But before you panic about the $50,000 settlement letter you received, understand what is likely going on.

HOW SIEMENS PLM SALES TACTICS MIMIC THOSE OF SELLING AN EXPENSIVE SUIT.

When you go to purchase a $300 suit, the salesperson will always show you the $2,000 suit first.  Then, he’ll show you an $1,800 suit that is obviously not nearly as nice as the $2,000 suit.  Then, he’ll show you a $1,000 suit that looks even less pleasing than the more expensive suits.  You begin to doubt whether a $500 suit will even give you the quality you thought you wanted.  But then… poof!  The salesperson finds a $500 suit, “in the back, that we just got in stock,” and that $500 suit is more beautiful than any of the other more expensive suits.  Excited that you are getting a good ‘deal’, you proceed to purchase the $500 suit, and while you are at it, you purchase a belt, buckles, an expensive tie and shirt, and spend another $300 in accessories and alterations.  In sum, you walk out of the store having spent $800, but you feel like a million bucks.

Obviously there is ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION between buying a suit and being hit in the face with a $150,000 copyright infringement lawsuit for tinkering with software that is being shared on the piracy bittorrent websites, supposedly for free (and what company monitors and sues on the piracy and unlawful USE of that software, anyway).  But there is something to say of this tactic.  No doubt if you end up paying $7,500 for their base software after being initially asked for $50,000, you’ll think you are getting a great ‘deal’. 

WHAT IS THE TRUE RETAIL PRICE OF SIEMENS PLM SOFTWARE?

I mentioned $7,500 as the guesstimate of the base price for the Siemens software, and really, I do not know what the base price actually is.  I have seen websites advertise the sale of that software from $7,500 – $12,500.  I have also seen ‘less credible’ sell ‘valid’ licenses for $2,500, so who really knows.

UPDATE: Siemens PLM business licenses (“seats”) can easily cost $30,000+ for each license.  There are various levels, e.g., Mach 1, Mach 2, Mach 3, and Mach 4, and the higher-level business licenses mirror the amount they are asking for from John Doe Defendants in their lawsuits, “in order to turn infringing users into genuine customers.”

As my general understanding goes (from speaking to various individuals at Siemens), Siemens NX software ranges in price from $7,500 – over $20,000 depending on the various modules, licenses, or versions you are purchasing.  And, business licenses are significantly more expensive than student licenses, which can be purchased for $99 (and on those student licenses, the receipt will often say, “you just saved yourself $9,999 on this software!” which suggests that the software itself costs over $10,000.

Most “John Doe” Defendants are being accused of using a pirated copy of the “NX Mach 3 Product Design” software.  You MUST assume that any Siemens PLM software is being similarly tracked; the list of software owned / provided by Siemens can be found at http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_us/

SHOULD I HIRE AN ATTORNEY AT THIS LATE STAGE OF THE LAWSUIT?

At this point, three methods of handling your lawsuit are flowing through your mind.

1) Paying the $60K and taking the hit (likely a bad move because I believe this price can be negotiated).

2) Ignoring this (who gets named and served anyway?) and risking the $150,000 judgment.  After you, you think you can’t pay $60K, so you can’t pay $150K either.  You’ll just take the loss and file for bankruptcy.  (Again, bad move because you would have exacerbated the situation.  Even if you are named and served as a defendant, it is not too late.  There are still ways to salvage the case and get you out of this, minimizing the damage to you).

3) Maybe you can hire an attorney, and he can negotiate this down to something that you feel comfortable paying.  And if not, at the very minimum, he can represent you in court with the best result of getting you dismissed from the lawsuit, and the alternative goal of forcing a lower settlement amount.  Realistically, your attorney can speak to your plaintiff attorney and negotiate a price that you can pay, or at a minimum come to some resolution to satisfy Siemens PLM’s claims against you.

So in sum, there are two BAD options, and two GOOD options.  The two BAD options are  1) PAY THE ASKING PRICE, 2) IGNORING THE LAWSUIT COMPLETELY.  The two GOOD options are either 1) hiring an attorney to NEGOTIATE YOUR SETTLEMENT, and 2) (if settling is not an option, OR if you simply did not do what Siemens claims you did), have that same attorney FIGHT THE LAWSUIT and minimize the damages, or get you dismissed altogether without paying any settlement.


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.

LIST OF ACTIVE SIEMENS PLM CASES
(as of 3/12/2017)

Cases Filed in the Texas Southern District Court:

Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software Inc. v. Does 1-100 (Case No. 4:16-cv-03552)
Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software, Inc. v. Does 1-100 (Case No. 4:16-cv-01422)

Siemens Software Case IS a Bittorrent Case

This is a follow-up article to the “What to do about the Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software Inc. v. Does case (TX)” article I wrote last week.

I did a bit more digging into the Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software Inc. v. Does 1-100 (Case No. 4:16-cv-01422) lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, and I learned more about their software, and more about where some of the John Doe defendants are coming from.  What I also learned was that this is not the first time they have sued defendants for copyright infringement.

The Siemens Product Lifecycle Management (“PLM”) software being sued over is known as the Siemens NX software.

According to Wikipedia, “NX, formerly known as NX Unigraphics or usually just UG, is an advanced high-end CAD/CAM/CAE software package originally developed by Unigraphics, but since 2007 by Siemens PLM Software… NX is a direct competitor to TopSolid, CATIA, Creo, Autodesk Inventor, and SolidWorks.”

The Pirate Bay shows 9 torrent files for “Siemens NX” software (below).

062016 Siemens PLM NX

Surprisingly, for version 9, there are only 3 seeders (uploaders).  For all others, there is only one seeder.  For a program that takes on average 1GB-5.7GB to download, a download like this could take forever to complete.

Looking at version 10 (the current stable release; version 11.2 is probably a fake), there is one seeder (uploader) and one leecher (downloader).  See attached.

062016 Siemens PLM NX 10

As dry as this post may be, the point is that my suspicions were correct — even though the bittorrent file provides a serial number (probably a valid, but likely an OLD registration code), and even though there is an “activator” which modifies or “cracks” the pirated file to allow the software to accept the old serial number [it likely does this by blocking the “authentication” feature when the software checks with the server to verify the registration key], the software looks to the user as if he has successfully registered the software.

However, through the CASUAL USE of the software, the activator software is likely not persistent, which means that after the software is registered using the old key, it restores the software’s executable (.exe) file to its original state.  Then, when using the software, it connects to Siemens’ servers for whatever purpose (to download an update, to check for new features, etc.), and this is how their copyright enforcement / IT department can identify the IP address of the individual using a pirated copy of the software.

In sum, what this means is that Robert Riddle and the Siemens copyright holder likely knows how long the software has been in use, and which IP addresses have been using an old or invalid serial number.  This will likely be a consideration when discussing the matter with the plaintiff attorneys on behalf of my clients.

What all this means for you — 1) June 22nd appears to be the date that Comcast will be ordered to hand over the names and addresses of the 100 accused John Doe defendants, so there is no anonymity and the John Doe defendants will be exposed to being named and served as defendants in the lawsuit. 2) If you have been using the software, they likely know more details than you would like as to what you have been doing with it.  3) Speak to an attorney (me, or anyone else) about what options you have to get out of this, whether you were the downloader, the purchaser (of a pirated copy of the software), or whether you have absolutely no idea why you have been implicated as being one of the John Doe defendants in this case.

OTHER ARTICLES ON THE SIEMENS PLM SOFTWARE CASES:

How an attorney should handle a Siemens PLM Software, Inc. lawsuit, on 1/11/2017.

Siemens PLM NX-based lawsuits – converting accused engineers into loyal customers, on 1/9/2017.

Software Developers are now tracking piracy through the USE of downloaded software, on 9/9/2016.

Siemens Software Case IS a Bittorrent Case, on 6/20/2016.

What to do about the Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software Inc. v. Does case (TX), on 1/16/2016.


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.