Cannabis Report
Home > Boards > US OTC > Computers - Software >

Worlds Inc (WDDD)

Add WDDD Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: PatentPlays, KidTraderDontHate, abcd12, PatentParsing
Search This Board: 
Last Post: 8/18/2018 1:06:02 PM - Followers: 262 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 0

Worlds Inc


Founded in 1994, Worlds Inc. invented and patented technology to solve problems associated with large-scale 3D multi-user environments, known as virtual worlds.

Worlds secured an early priority date by filing a provisional application with the USPTO in Nov, 1995. Within a year, Worlds filed a non-provisional patent application, claiming the priority date of their 1995 provisional application.

Worlds has pursued additional claims associated with their invention through a series of continuing patent applications, amassing a substantial patent portfolio:

Filing Date Patent Number Issue Date
Nov 13, 1995 app 60/020,296 provisional
Nov 12, 1996 6,219,045 Apr 17, 2001
Aug 3, 2000 7,181,690 Feb 20, 2007
Nov 2, 2006 7,493,558 Feb 17, 2009
Jan 13, 2009 7,945,856 May 17, 2011
Mar 19, 2009 8,082,501 Dec 20, 2011
Mar 19, 2009 8,145,998 Mar 27, 2012
Apr 8, 2011 8,161,385 Apr 17, 2012
Apr 11, 2011 8,407,592 Mar 26, 2013
Jun 16, 2011 8,640,028 Jan 28, 2014

Their patent portfolio remains in force until Nov, 2016 (20 years from the filing date of their first non-provisional patent application).

Worlds v. Activision


On Mar 30, 2012, Worlds filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Activision. Worlds’ lawsuit seeks monetary damages as well as a permanent injunction barring the manufacture and sale of infringing devices. Additionally, the complaint accuses Activision of willfully infringing and seeks an award of exemplary damages, attorneys' fees, and related court costs.


Susman Godfrey is representing Worlds, without fee, unless the lawsuit is successful or is favorably settled out of court. Susman Godfrey is considered the top litigation boutique in the country. Max Tribble, lead counsel of Susman Godfrey, is the lead counsel for Worlds. Tribble has an extensive track record of patent infringement lawsuit wins and settlements for plaintiffs in lawsuits against large corporations, including:

Paltalk v. Microsoft

Mass Engineered Design v. Ergotron & Dell, et al

Sky Technologies v. Oracle

Sky Technologies v. IBM

November 30, 2016

The Unites States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a ruling in Bungie, Inc (Developer Partner of Activision Blizzard) v. Worlds, Inc. validating certain key patent claims governing multiplayer interaction. 12 Claims were validated over 3 Patents.

IPR PTAB Validation on Worlds Patent 8145998 Claims 2,3,7,8, 11-18

IPR PTAB Validation on Worlds Patent 7493558 Claims 5, 7

IPR PTAB Validation on Worlds Patent 7181690 Claims 4, 8, 13, 16

December 5th 2016:

Worlds (WDDD) as well owns  9.3%  of Marimed (Nasdaq; MRMD) as of the  12/31/16 financial statement

December 6th 2016

Worlds Inc. (OTC QB:WDDD) is a leading intellectual property developer and licensee of patents related to 3D online virtual worlds. The Company has a portfolio of 9 US patents (6,219,045; 7,181,690; 7,493,558; 7,945,856; 8,082,501; 8,145,998; 8,161,385 8,407,592& 8,640,028) for multi-server technology in 3D applications, notably Virtual Worlds. The earliest of these patents issued on an application filed November 12, 1996. A provisional patent application, serial number 60/020,296, was filed on November 13, 1995.

These patents are related to each other and disclose and claim systems and methods for enabling users to interact in a virtual space. Worlds Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Activision Blizzard, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. and Activision Publishing, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on March 30, 2012.

Activision's World of Warcraft and Call of Duty video games have been identified in the complaint as infringing on Worlds' patents. Max L Tribble, lead counsel of Susman Godfrey L.L.P, will be lead counsel for Worlds in the suit.

The Markman hearing for the patent infringement suit by Worlds Inc. against Activision Blizzard, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. and Activision Publishing, Inc. (Activision Blizzard et al) (Nasdaq: ATVI), was held October 3, 2014 to address various aspects of the infringement suit claims and how the words in the 11 disputed 'constructions' in the claims should be construed for jury consideration. On June 26, 2015 Judge Denise Casper of the United District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in favor of certain Worlds key definitions and interpretations governing the construction claims. Activision Blizzard the defendant in this action became “time-barred” to file an action to challenge the Patents using the only “other” venue that has the authority to disqualify the patents, The United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

December 6th 2016: 
Worlds current Federal Trial is on mutual consent hold pending the disposition of the validation or denial action of the PTAB. The Company's principle goal will be to continue to grow its IP portfolio, while protecting and monetizing it through patent infringement litigation. In addition, Worlds Inc. intends to be active in the creation and acquisition of related digital media technologies and patents that complement their current patent portfolio and that broaden the features, versatility and reach of the technology to allow for its utilization in the broadest possible way.

December 20th 2016

Worlds to Appeal to Federal Circuit on PTAB Rulings, Claims Marketwire   "Press Releases"
BOSTON, MA -- (Marketwired) -- 12/20/16 -- Worlds Inc. (OTCQB: WDDD) intends to file an appeal of recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rulings to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding Worlds' seminal technology that has been fundamental to the development of massively multiplayer online role-playing gaming (MMORPG) into a $20-billion dollar industry. Worlds' current investors plan to exercise their warrants to fund the appeals and ongoing business operations.

August 25, 2017
Appellate Case #17-1481 

Bungie, Inc. files a reply to the Unites States Court Of Appeals arguing that Worlds IPR case should be upheld from the previous PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) Order. The PTAB is an Executive Branch Agency empowered by Congress under the American Invents Act- Currently under scrutiny by the Supreme Court under
Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC  Case 16-712 ). The filing  for Bungie is open as of 8/29/2017 included below:

**UPDATED** Worlds Reply Brief to Bungies Reply of the above 9/22/2017

***UPDATED** 10/23/2017  Worlds case is partially dependent on the Wi-Fi One En Banc Appellate decision due out anytime. Worlds alleges that Bungie is acting in concert (privity)with Activision Blizzard ( a time barred Plaintiff for IPR purposes). Today there is no precedent to allow the PTAB Director or Board to be challenged with Judicial Review from the Courts. Wi-Fi one asks the courts to reverse Achaides and allow "judicial review"

"Should this court overrule Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple Inc., 803 F.3d 652 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and hold that judicial review is available for a patent owner to challenge the PTO’s determination that the petitioner satisfied the timeliness requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) governing the filing of petitions for inter partes review?"
***UPDATED** 1/8/2018 Wi-Fi One WINS ruling on Judicail Review for the Time Bar. Worlds can advance  the argument the PTAB erred in allowing Bungie, Inc to file as they were Time Barred.

***UPDATED 3-12-2018****

BOSTON, March 12, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Worlds Inc.’s (OTCQB:WDDD) oral argument in its appeal of three Inter Partes Review (IPR) decisions issued in 2016 from the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office Patent Trial & Appeal Board (USPTO PTAB), was held before U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Friday, March 9, 2018. All three of the judges handling Worlds’ appeal, Chief Judge Prost, Judge O’Malley, and Judge Taranto, were in the majority opinion in an earlier case, Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., in which the CAFC confirmed that patent owners could appeal whether an IPR petition was filed too late under the law and therefore had to be vacated.  CAFC decisions usually take three to four months to issue after oral argument, and a ruling on World’s appeal could issue by early- to mid-summer of 2018.

Since Wi-Fi One’s significant, precedent-setting ruling on January 8, 2018, Worlds’ appeal is the first case before the CAFC to seek the federal court’s oversight of the PTAB’s handling of the time-bar question.

“We are pleased with the CAFC selection of the judiciary panel which heard and will determine the outcome of our appeal,” stated Thom Kidrin, CEO of Worlds Inc.  “The Court allotted extra time during the oral arguments, indicating the Judges’ keen interest in the Related Party of Interest (RPI) issues pertaining to Bungie’s relationship with Activision in our case, and whether Bungie’s IPR Petitions were filed too late under the law as a result of that relationship.  Thanks to the Wi-Fi One ruling, which established the CAFC’s right to review how the PTAB is handling RPI questions, the CAFC panel was very prepared and engaged.”

“The probing and pointed questions of the Judges indicated a firm grasp of the details and nuances of Worlds’ case, and a desire for equity as well as a proper application of the law in their inquiry,” added Mr. Kidrin.

The oral arguments can be heard at:

The CAFC has the authority to vacate the PTAB ruling or remand the matter of the appealed IPRs back to the PTAB for reconsideration with guidance from the CAFC.

Worlds was represented before the Federal Circuit by Wayne M. Helge of Davidson, Berquist, Jackson & Gowdey, LLP, who handled the IPRs before the PTAB, and is represented in the federal district court litigation by Susman Godfrey L.L.P. 

More information on the lawsuit and Worlds’ patents can be found on the website.


Cannabis Report
Current Price
Bid Ask Day's Range
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 2M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 2Y
  • 3Y
  • 5Y
PlusOneCoin Top Posts
No plusone'd posts yet. Be the first!
#32431  Sticky Note No Appellate Response Today 8/6/2018 for 17-1481 Appeal PatentPlays 08/06/18 04:07:15 PM
#32021  Sticky Note Latest valuation estimates PatentParsing 06/07/18 03:13:24 PM
#32534   It was there for most of the ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 04:54:30 PM
#32531   "Imagine if there is a short squeeze on White Coal 08/17/18 01:19:03 PM
#32530   The PR firm Thom hired will have this PatentPlays 08/17/18 01:09:51 PM
#32529   strap in! Hold tight! She is going far ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 10:06:50 AM
#32528   tic toc grind or spaceship to .50s soon. ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 09:45:02 AM
#32527   "terribly concerned" lmao he should be "terribly concerned" ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 09:43:16 AM
#32526   he's pissed cuz he's sunk in cctc doghouse land ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 09:42:29 AM
#32525   Imagine if there is a short squeeze on buylosellhi 08/17/18 09:38:32 AM
#32524   .50 was kissed with a 1,000 lot at ShadowSpy69 08/17/18 09:32:58 AM
#32523   Wow!.50 cents at market openning. Patience to success 08/17/18 09:32:56 AM
#32522   Just checked 9:31am No release from CAFC PatentPlays 08/17/18 09:31:34 AM
#32521   5 years ago Whitey Bolger was found guilty WhiteOwl 08/17/18 08:39:15 AM
#32520   Hey quilt. If you're referring to my comment, tradetrak 08/16/18 11:11:57 PM
#32519   Thanks, Looking4. That's exactly the type of experience tradetrak 08/16/18 11:07:00 PM
#32518   Ahoy matey, how's the sailin' been? Ya know ItsAlive 08/16/18 06:20:22 PM
#32517   Yeah, been here since the VRNG days, lol. ItsAlive 08/16/18 06:06:24 PM
#32516   8 opinions today ALL precedential quilt 08/16/18 05:53:02 PM
#32515   I am sorry i do not agree with quilt 08/16/18 05:48:51 PM
#32514   White Coal is terribly concerned about the compensation sellhibylo 08/16/18 05:43:54 PM
#32513   Did you like the self effacing, Because I stark12 08/16/18 05:04:03 PM
#32512   Actually, I find the math very reveling - Captart7 08/16/18 04:15:35 PM
#32511   Kidrin's compensation seems entirely reasonable to me. sellhibylo 08/16/18 04:05:33 PM
#32510   I got worried when I saw Captain Obvious' sellhibylo 08/16/18 04:02:46 PM
#32509   I gave Tobacco as an example. Looking4BIGcash 08/16/18 03:23:22 PM
#32508   I don't see a parallel between class action abcd12 08/16/18 02:41:59 PM
#32507   Kidrin has made WDDD Millions with his spinning White Coal 08/16/18 02:38:35 PM
#32506   Like I said.. Y'all seem pretty generous. White Coal 08/16/18 02:34:38 PM
#32505   Kidrin has made WDDD Millions with his spinning Captart7 08/16/18 02:32:34 PM
#32504   Investors want him well paid so that he buylosellhi 08/16/18 01:50:21 PM
#32503   Because I don't know much about WDDD White Coal 08/16/18 01:14:09 PM
#32502   So am I. I have been 6 years, Patience to success 08/16/18 12:54:16 PM
#32501   I would say that is not correct. Looking4BIGcash 08/16/18 12:44:47 PM
#32500   We all feel the same way. It's like Captart7 08/16/18 12:31:50 PM
#32499   I am getting totally frustrated after 5 years WhiteOwl 08/16/18 12:12:09 PM
#32498   Don't forget the laches doctrine when account for abcd12 08/16/18 11:08:45 AM
#32497   Forgot to include Trade, Quilt, and Data. kid shaleen 08/16/18 11:07:52 AM
#32496   PP,Mad,ABC,LT,Capt, and all others knowledgeable in soon kid shaleen 08/16/18 11:03:55 AM
#32495   Only the Pacer site. Watching today for a PatentPlays 08/16/18 10:00:46 AM
#32494   Anyone happen to know if Opinions and Orders IveBeenBagged 08/15/18 09:50:10 PM
#32493   Well, given that there is NO remaining life tradetrak 08/15/18 05:36:44 PM
#32492   It all depends on when the infringement started abcd12 08/15/18 03:47:10 PM
#32491   I have been following the CAFC opinions and meddoyeddo 08/15/18 02:48:02 PM
#32490   I would guess that any decision would be Captart7 08/15/18 02:21:25 PM
#32489   Do you know what time during the day Patience to success 08/15/18 12:13:17 PM
#32488   Very quiet today...Could today be the day? Captart7 08/15/18 11:47:38 AM
#32487   Just like wifi one.... it will be worth Bescaredxx 08/15/18 10:42:06 AM
#32486   Yes, obviously. tradetrak 08/15/18 12:29:20 AM
#32485   The way most envision it and how it madprophet 08/14/18 06:25:55 PM
#32484   I'm just a lowly software engineer so I buylosellhi 08/14/18 04:27:19 PM
#32483   Yeah, I was really excited to see it. tradetrak 08/14/18 03:26:13 PM