According to Macrovision's most recent quarterly filing with the SEC, they have settled patent litigation with privately held InterTrust. The Macrovision patents involved include this one which they had acquired. Macrovision's 2nd Qtr 200710Q says (pages 14-15):
USPTO Interference Proceedings Between Macrovision Corporation and Intertrust Technologies
The Company received notice on September 4, 2003 that the USPTO had declared an interference between our U.S. Patent No. 5,845,281 (“the ’281 patent”) together with two of our continuation applications, and a patent application from Intertrust Technologies Corporation (“Intertrust”). On or about December 28, 2005, the Board of Patent Appeals (“BPA”) issued its final ruling in the case, holding that the ‘281 patent had priority over the two Intertrust patent applications at issue, but also that the inventor of the ‘281 patent had committed inequitable conduct during the prosecution of that patent. As a result of this decision, the Company’s ‘281 patent was rendered unenforceable.
On December 19, 2003, the Company received notice from the USPTO declaring another interference, this time between two of its patent applications and four of Intertrust’s patents. On or about April 11, 2005, the BPA issued its final ruling, holding that the Intertrust patents had priority over the Company’s two applications at issue.
Intertrust and Macrovision filed lawsuits on July 28, 2006 and July 31, 2006, respectively, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the other party, seeking to overturn the BPA’s rulings adverse to the parties in the two interference proceedings. In June 2007, the parties reached a settlement of the matter whereby both parties dismissed their respective claims with prejudice. The other terms of the settlement are confidential.