Stingray Digital Group said it has filed counter claims against Music Choice, the rival music-over-multichannel programmer that, in June, sued Stingray for patent infringement after getting dropped by AT&T U-verse in favor of Stingray Music.  

Montreal-based Stingray said it filed, on Tuesday, an answer and counterclaim against the Music Choice lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, where Music Choice filed its suit. Stingray Music USA separately filed a lawsuit against Music Choice asserting "claims of unfair competition, defamation, trade libel, tortious interference with existing and prospective contractual relationships, and unfair competition." 

“As explained in our Complaint, Music Choice has displayed a pattern of trying to stifle new market entrants with false statements and unfair commercial practices,” Eric Boyko, president, co-founder and CEO of Stingray, said in a release. “Instead of disseminating false facts and filing lawsuits, Music Choice should use its resources to innovate its offerings and improve relations with its remaining customers and suppliers.”

Stingray also said in the release that the patents Music Choice asserted were invalid partly because of "certain prior art technology previously owned by a Music Choice subsidiary (subsequently purchased by Stingray in a share purchase transaction) of which the U.S. Patent Office was unaware during the prosecution of the patents." The Stingray Music USA lawsuit will seek monetary damages "for the harm it suffered as a result of Music Choice’s attempts to damage Stingray’s reputation and exclude it from lawfully competing in the U.S. market,” according to Stingray, which has also seen its music programming expand on Comcast Xfinity this year.

Music Choice through a spokesperson said the company had "received their notice of filing and are reviewing it. No further comment at this time." The programmer, established in 1991, is owned by a partnership among subsidiaries of Microsoft, Arris, Sony Corp. of America, EMI Music Publishing, Time Warner Inc., Comcast Cable Communications, Cox Communications and Time Warner Cable (now being transferred to Charter Communications, according to Music Choice).

Cablevision Systems said it has settled a nearly five-year old suit with founder Charles Dolan’s son Thomas, agreeing to pay him $21 million to cancel wrongful termination litigation he brought against the company after the demise of its former Voom HD service.

According to documents filed with the SEC, Cablevision paid Thomas Dolan on Feb. 8. As part of that settlement, Cablevision founder and chairman Charles Dolan and CEO James Dolan have agreed to pay an aggregate of $6 million to the company as partial reimbursement in the event Cablevision’s planned merger with Altice is not consummated.

In the SEC filing, Cablevision said the payment to Thomas Dolan is permitted by its merger agreement with Altice N.V. and “does not reduce or otherwise affect the consideration payable to the company’s stockholders under the merger agreement.”

Thomas Dolan brought the suit in New York State Supreme Court in 2011 and in April 2015 the court granted a summary judgment to the plaintiff on liability, with damages to be determined. In June 2015, Cablevision filed a notice of appeal. Thomas Dolan is currently executive vice president, strategy and development at Cablevision. In 2004 he was named president and CEO of Voom, the former HD unit of  programming arm of Rainbow Media.

Cablevision had high hopes for Voom and its original HD content, but soon discovered the unit was moot after practically every other content provider offered its own programming in HD. The unit -- which was shuttered in 2008 -- was the source of another high-profile litigation – against Dish Network, which had signed on as its first big distribution customer. Dish settled that suit in 2012  for about $700 million, of which Cablevision received about $525 million.

“This matter from a decade ago has been settled," Cablevision said in a statement. "It has been handled by an Independent Committee of the Board of Directors and the company will have no comment.”