Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 1 of 6 Exhibit 15 Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 2 of 6 Form 1 Front sheet FDN IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA IN THE CIVIL JURISDICTION SCCIV 1280 of 2016 BETWEEN GLOBAL EQUITY MANAGEMENT (SA) PTY LTD Plaintiff and ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION Defendant SECOND AFFIDAVIT 0F SCHUMANN RAFIZADEH Filed on behalf of the Plaintiff, Conatur Legal GLOBAL EQUITY MANAGEMENT 1026 South Road (SA) PTY LTD by Edwardstown SA 5039 Telephone: 08 8177 2043 Mobile: Facsimile: 08 8177 2049 Email: info@eonatur.com.au Code: L2529 'P'Code: P11257 Settled by: Sean Richter Date and time of ?ling or transmission: Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 3 of 6 Rule 162 Form 33 Af?davit AFFIDAVIT I SCHUMANN RAFIZADEH of 59 Gully Road, Seacliff Park 5049, Technology Inventor and Director SWEAR ON OATH THAT: 1. The purpose of this affidavit is to file additional material in support of the Plaintiff?s application seeking injunctive relief, filed on 4 October 2016. 2. The Defendant, Electronic Frontier Foundation (?The Defendant?), Entity Number C2543553 is a US based registered company and is a legal entity capable of suing and being sued in the State of California. A copy of the business entity detail record is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters 3. Global Equity Management (SAplaintiff litigant party to a considerably large number of US based patent litigation. In these cases, GEMSA is the plaintiff party seeking to enforce its rights and seek adequate compensation for the unlawful usage of its US Patent No. 6,690,400 (?the Patent?). 4. A copy of Virtual Technology Strategy is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters A COpy of expert report produced to the Eastern District Court of Texas is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters 5. As result of the misrepresentations published in the article titled ?Stupid Patent of the Month Storage Cabinets on a Computer? (?the Article") the Plaintiff has suffered significant damages. Further it is likely to suffer increasing losses unless the article is withdrawn and its dissemination is stopped. PASHA IRANMEHR A Commissioner for taking oaths af?davits in the Supreme Court of South Australia- 20d; Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 4 of 6 11. Since the publication of the Article, U.S Defendants have joined and instated two lnterparte Proceedings against GEMSA in the United States. This is the first time ,j that such proceedings have been instituted to directly challenge GEMSA, starting 1 with the ?400 Patent described in the Article. A copy of the lnterparte Proceedings case no. is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters 12. On or about 9 November 2016 the Eastern District Court of Texas, United States will hear an application by the Plaintiff to confirm the legitimacy of the patent. This is known as ?Markman Hearing.? A Markman Hearing is a pre-trial hearing which all claim construction issues and disputes over meaning, scope and interpretation are decided, prior to the commencement of the main trial, which is normally conducted before a jury. A copy of the Plaintiff?s opening claim-construction brief is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters 13. Following publication of the article, the Eastern District Court of Texas ruled that a third party expert be appointed to investigate the authenticity of the Patent. A copy of the Court Order of the Eastern District of Texas is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters I believe that this ruling was as a consequence of the publication of the Article. 14. The Defendant Company is funded by a large corporation which is a competitor in the field in which the plaintiff operates. In particular, the Defendant has received a large amount of funding from Mark Cuban. A copy of the article Patent Gets Half-Million?Dollar Boost from Mark Cuban and Notch? is exhibited and marked with the letter 15. Mark Cuban is a private benefactor with investments within other American Companies subject to Patent Litigation. I believe that he has directly influenced the publication of the article, as a malicious and misleading attempt to sabotage our position. In support of this conclusion I note that the article has exhibited the unsealed complaints filed by GEMSA against Air BNB and Zillow. These documents are not available in the public domain and can only be obtained through one of the Defendants in that litigation. A copy of the complaint unsealed complaint attached to the article is exhibited and hereto marked with the letter i .rl PASHA IRANMEHR Way/f ii A Commissioner for taking oaths af?davits in th :1 52/7 Supreme Court of South Australia. Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 5 of 6 10. Damages and Losses . GEMSA largely makes its profits from the licensing fees borne by companies who have used, or who are interested in using, the Patent product. A copy of FVOS Patents Terms of Licensing is exhibited hereto and marked with the letter GEMSA widely advertises its product, and seeks new company clients through the con?dential dissemination of sales material which explains the technological and complex nature of the product. GEMSA also enforces breaches of the patent license against companies that the Companies? technology unwittingly, and demands that they enter into negotiations to pay licensing fees. If the relevant marketplace in which GEMSA operates is influenced to the degree that it considers our patent to be ?stupid?, then GEMSA will suffer significant losses to its licensing profits. Furthermore, GEMSA had organised and planned multiple mediation efforts with respect to the U.S cases in which it a plaintiff party enforcing the unwitting use of our patent. Many of these mediations were cancelled or delayed without reason following the publication of the article. The Plaintiff was forced to incur resulting expenses including preparatory legal costs, overseas travel costs and expert?s cancelations fees. This is an estimated loss exceeding $25,000.00. Since the publication of the Article, the Plaintiff has experienced a diminishment in interest from the respective U.S Defendants whom are party to the patent litigation. Those Defendant parties have shown a reduced interest in pursuing pre-trial settlement negotiations due to the damaged credibility of GEMSA. The Plaintiff was served with a lawsuit by companies Amazon and VDATA filed in the State of Virginia on 22 July 2016. The complaint sought declaratoryjudgement of non-infringement and invalidity of patents. A copy of the complaint is exhibited hereto and marked with the letters I believe this lawsuit flowed as sequelae to the publication of the article. This was the ?rst time that GEMSA had been sued and has damaged its impeccable credibility. As a result, GEMSA has had to endure the continuing costs of litigation, and needed to hire a law firm in the state of Virginia to protect its rights. This is an estimated loss exceeding $50,000.00. Mia PASHA IRANMEHR . A Commissioner for taking oaths 85 af?davits in the Supreme Court of South Australia Case Document 1-15 Filed 04/12/17 Page 6 of 6 16. I know this my affidavit to be true and correct of my own knowledge. SWORN by the above named deponent #3772016 Before me: PASHA IRANMEHR A Commissioner for taking oaths 85 af?davits in the Supreme Court of South Australia