Commitments and Contingencies | 9. Commitments and Contingencies Legal Matters The Company, from time to time, is party to litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. Management does not believe that the outcome of these claims will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Company based on the status of proceedings at this time. On July 8, 2016, a complaint was filed by Brand Technologies, Inc. naming the Company, along with several others, as a defendant in a case alleging copyright infringement, violations of the Lanham Act, unfair competition and related claims (Brand Technologies, Inc. v. Cox Enterprises, Inc., et al., United States District Court for the Central District of California). The complaint, subsequently amended twice by the plaintiff, alleges that Cox Media Group (CMG) engaged in the unlicensed provision of copyrighted videos owned by the plaintiff on CMG websites by using our technology. The amended complaint seeks actual and statutory damages, costs and injunctive relief. The defendants filed two separate motions to dismiss, both of which were granted and resulted in a narrowing of the claims in the amended complaint. The Company answered the amended complaint on April 21, 2017. On May 22, 2017, the plaintiff dismissed the case with prejudice; Brightcove did not incur a loss as a result of this matter. On May 22, 2017, a lawsuit was filed against Brightcove and two individuals by Ooyala, Inc. (“Ooyala”) and Ooyala Mexico S. de R.L. de C.V. (“Ooyala Mexico”). The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, concerns allegations that the two individuals, who are former employees of Ooyala Mexico, misappropriated customer information and other trade secrets and used that information in working for Brightcove. The complaint was amended on June 1, 2017 to remove claims against the two former employees of Ooyala Mexico. The remaining claims against Brightcove are for violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (18 U.S.C. §1836), violation of the Massachusetts trade secret statute (M.G.L. c. 93, §42), violation of Massachusetts Chapter 93A (M.G.L. c. 93A, §11), and tortious interference with advantageous business relationships. Ooyala and Ooyala Mexico also filed a motion for preliminary injunction (amended at the same time the complaint was amended), seeking to enjoin Brightcove and the two individuals from using any of the allegedly misappropriated information or communicating with customers whose information was taken, and seeking the return of any information that was taken. On June 16, 2017, Brightcove filed an opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction, and also moved to dismiss the lawsuit. The Company cannot yet determine whether it is probable that a loss will be incurred in connection with this complaint, nor can the Company reasonably estimate the potential loss, if any. Guarantees and Indemnification Obligations The Company typically enters into indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of business. Pursuant to these agreements, the Company indemnifies and agrees to reimburse the indemnified party for losses and costs incurred by the indemnified party, generally the Company’s customers, in connection with patent, copyright, trade secret, or other intellectual property or personal right infringement claim by third parties with respect to the Company’s technology. The term of these indemnification agreements is generally perpetual after execution of the agreement. Based on when customers first subscribe for the Company’s service, the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under certain of these indemnification agreements is unlimited, however, more recently the Company has typically limited the maximum potential value of such potential future payments in relation to the value of the contract. Based on historical experience and information known as of June 30, 2017, the Company has not incurred any costs for the above guarantees and indemnities. The Company has received requests for indemnification from customers in connection with patent infringement suits brought against the customer by a third party. To date, the Company has not agreed that the requested indemnification is required by the Company’s contract with any such customer. In certain circumstances, the Company warrants that its products and services will perform in all material respects in accordance with its standard published specification documentation in effect at the time of delivery of the licensed products and services to the customer for the warranty period of the product or service. To date, the Company has not incurred significant expense under its warranties and, as a result, the Company believes the estimated fair value of these agreements is immaterial. |