Oxylabs Invalidates Four of Bright Data’s Patents in Court
Bright Data’s grip on residential proxy technology is slipping.
- Published:
On August 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals confirmed the lack of validity for four of Bright Data’s patents: no. 10,257,319; 10,484,510; 11,044,342 and 11,044,344.
The Israeli company used these patents as a basis for its residential proxy server technology – and as a bludgeon to challenge other providers in court.
The Court’s decision upholds an earlier decision made by the U.S. Patent Office. It came as part of a sprawling dispute between Oxylabs and Bright Data and invalidated Bright Data’s patents based on their obviousness and appearance in prior art.
Throughout the years, Bright Data had sued multiple companies over matters relating directly to or involving its patents, such as NetNut, Oxylabs, and BiScience (GeoSurf). It had also intimidated competitors like SOAX against renting proxy servers in Texas, which Bright Data uses as the venue for litigation.
Oxylabs had the following comment:
We welcome the Court’s recent decision to invalidate Bright Data patents, including the two patents previously used in litigation against Oxylabs over our residential proxy technology. In our view, this outcome strongly supports the position we’ve maintained for years.
Although the process was lengthy, it reaffirms our belief that the legal system ultimately ensures fair decisions – benefiting not only Oxylabs but the entire market.
We’re grateful to our legal team, advisors, and colleagues for their dedication. At Oxylabs, we remain committed to fair competition, technological innovation, and defending both.
Bright Data preferred not to comment.
While significant, this development doesn’t conclude the legal battles in the proxy server market. However, it does allow providers to breathe a little easier.
We believe that ideas should be rewarded – as the proxy market grows mature, patents may serve that purpose. However, patents must be carefully crafted to protect genuinely innovative ideas rather than be weaponized to stifle competition or exclude legitimate market participants.
