ScorpCast v. Bravomax & MG Freesites: Interactive Video Patent Dismissed With Prejudice
ScorpCast LLC, operating as HaulStars, brought patent infringement claims against Bravomax Services and MG Freesites — operators of Pornhub and related adult video platforms — asserting US9965780B2. After over three and a half years of litigation before Judge Rodney Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas, all parties jointly moved to dismiss with prejudice, with each side bearing its own legal costs.
Multi-defendant interactive video patent action resolved with prejudice in E.D. Tex.
ScorpCast LLC, doing business as HaulStars, filed this infringement action on June 16, 2020 in the Eastern District of Texas before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, asserting US9965780B2 against Bravomax Services Ltd. and MG Freesites Ltd. The defendants are associated with Pornhub and a constellation of related adult video hub sites. The case was one of at least seven parallel actions filed by ScorpCast in the same court around the same period, spanning case numbers 2:20-cv-192 through 2:20-cv-210.
On January 17, 2024, the Court granted a joint motion to dismiss filed by all remaining parties, closing the case with prejudice. The order explicitly noted that the matter had been ‘resolved,’ language consistent with a confidential settlement preceding the formal dismissal. Because dismissal was entered with prejudice, ScorpCast is permanently barred from reasserting the same patent claims against these specific defendants in any future proceeding. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.
The case ran for approximately 1,310 days — over three and a half years — before resolution, suggesting protracted pre-trial litigation rather than an early walkaway. The coordinated closure of six related dockets in a single order is consistent with a global settlement resolving all ScorpCast claims across the defendant group simultaneously. The financial terms, if any, remain undisclosed in the public record, leaving the commercial outcome between the parties unknown.
Filing to filing in 1310 days
Days from filing to dismissal — a multi-year contested infringement action
Full party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | ScorpCast, LLC | Company | Interactive video technology licensing entity — holder of US9965780B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Bravomax Services, Ltd. | Company | Adult video platform operators, including Pornhub and related hub sitesSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Todd Eric Landis | Attorney | Counsel for ScorpCast, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Frank M. Gasparo | Attorney | Counsel for Bravomax Services, Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | J. Daniel Harkins | Attorney | Counsel for Bravomax Services, Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Jaewon Lee | Attorney | Counsel for Bravomax Services, Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Jonathan Mark Sharret | Attorney | Counsel for Bravomax Services, Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Rodney Gilstrap | Chief Judge | Texas Eastern District Court — Chief JudgeSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Stipulation of dismissal — official text
The dismissal order grants the joint motion outright, finding no basis to deny it. The phrase ‘has been resolved’ in the order’s recitation of the parties’ representations is legally meaningful: it signals a pre-existing private agreement rather than a unilateral abandonment. The with-prejudice designation extinguishes ScorpCast’s right to refile the same claims against these specific defendants, while the own-costs ruling neutralises any lingering fee-shifting exposure. All pending relief is denied as moot, cleanly closing all six related dockets.
US9965780B2 — Interactive video platform and hub site technology
US9965780B2, filed under application number US15/688566, is held by ScorpCast LLC and relates to interactive video platform technology — specifically the mechanisms by which video content is surfaced, linked, and navigated across hub-style websites. The patent was asserted against Pornhub and related sites described as ‘jump sites,’ suggesting the claims cover content discovery, recommendation, or interactive overlay features central to how large video platforms route and present content to users.
For the streaming and user-generated video sector, this patent represents a recurring enforcement risk. ScorpCast’s willingness to pursue six defendants simultaneously — including one of the world’s most visited websites — indicates confidence in the patent’s claim scope and enforceability. Competitors operating video hub architecture, interactive player features, or content aggregation systems should treat US9965780B2 as a benchmark for FTO analysis before shipping new platform features.
Should your video platform run an FTO against US9965780B2?
Any team building or operating a video hub, interactive streaming service, or content aggregation platform that routes users between videos or surfaces related content should assess exposure to US9965780B2. ScorpCast demonstrated willingness to assert this patent against high-traffic platforms with significant resources, suggesting the economics of assertion are favourable relative to licensing revenue. R&D teams shipping recommendation engines, interactive overlays, or cross-site content linking features are the most directly exposed.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim landscape of US9965780B2 against your product architecture and flag related applications in the ScorpCast family that may not yet be asserted. Claim monitoring alerts ensure you are notified if continuation applications with new claim language publish. Running a scoped FTO before product launch is significantly cheaper than defending a multi-year E.D. Texas infringement action.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US9965780B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar interactive video patent cases in E.D. Texas and beyond
PatSnap Eureka tracks related litigation across truck body equipment, vehicle accessories, and comparable infringement actions in the Georgia district system.
What this case signals for the interactive video IP landscape
ScorpCast’s multi-defendant campaign in E.D. Tex. illustrates how interactive video patents can be leveraged across large platform operators simultaneously.
E.D. Texas remains an active venue for multi-defendant patent campaigns
Filing six parallel actions before Judge Gilstrap — a known patent-friendly docket — is a deliberate venue choice. Platform companies receiving demand letters referencing E.D. Tex. filings should treat them as serious, not boilerplate. This district’s case management pace and plaintiff-friendly reputation continue to drive litigation strategy for licensing-focused entities.
Interactive video patents carry real enforcement risk for streaming platforms
US9965780B2 was asserted against one of the internet’s highest-traffic video platforms. Any company operating a video hub, interactive streaming product, or user-generated video platform should audit claims of this patent family. The multi-year duration before resolution suggests defendants engaged seriously rather than treating this as a nuisance suit.
ScorpCast v Bravomax — key questions answered
The case was dismissed with prejudice by joint motion on January 17, 2024. The court’s order noted the matter had been resolved by the parties, consistent with a private settlement. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. ScorpCast cannot refile the same patent claims against these defendants.
ScorpCast asserted US9965780B2 (application number US15/688566), an interactive video platform patent. The patent was alleged to cover technology used in Pornhub and related adult video hub sites, referred to in case documents as ‘jump sites.’ The specific claims and their mapping to the defendants’ products were not disclosed in the public record.
ScorpCast filed parallel infringement actions against multiple defendants in the Eastern District of Texas around the same period. Judge Gilstrap’s January 2024 order closed six related dockets simultaneously — 2:20-cv-192 through 2:20-cv-210 — suggesting the parties negotiated a global resolution covering all defendants and all related cases as a single package, which is common in multi-defendant NPE licensing campaigns.
Not necessarily. Dismissal with prejudice entered on a joint motion typically reflects a negotiated resolution rather than a court ruling on the merits. The with-prejudice designation simply means ScorpCast cannot refile the same claims against these defendants. Any financial or licensing terms agreed between the parties would be in a private settlement agreement not disclosed in the court record.
The case was heard in the Eastern District of Texas before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, one of the most active patent litigation venues in the United States. E.D. Texas is frequently chosen by patent assertion entities due to its established patent case law, experienced bench, and historically plaintiff-friendly procedural environment. Venue choice in this district can materially affect case management timelines and settlement leverage.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.