Actually, no, this one seems legit, at least insofar as Samsung is implicated.
From the lawsuit:
22. In or around the beginning of 2002, Patrick Racz, one of the co-inventors of the patents- in-suit, collaborated with Britney Spears to commercialize the technology covered by the patents-in-suit.
23. Mark Steverson, one of Ms. Spears’ lawyers, was involved in these commercialization efforts.
24. Mr. Steverson contacted Samsung Richardson and eventually gave a presentation to Samsung Richardson about the technology covered by the patents-in-suit and Mr. Racz’s plans to continue developing the technology for reader player devices and cell phones.
Actually no. You need to read the patents in suit. There are seven patents all virtually identical to the first. They are BUSINESS MODEL PATENTS. . . for a business that the "inventor" does not and never has practiced. He essentially claims to have invented the idea of buying digital content over the Internet with a credit/debit card so one could download or have access to the content for streaming. He doesn't really described the MEANS of doing it, just the idea of doing it. . . saying the buyer could use his card to buy it, then get access, proving he has the right to download it, because he used a card, which could then be used again to access the same content again later as proof he had the right for access. He also claimed in court to have invented the concept of Digital Rights Management because he mentions the content could be protected "somehow by codes or encrypted" in his patent. Again, he doesn't say HOW to do that, just that the customer would be somehow provided with the key to decrypt the content after paying with their credit card.
In a later patent filed in 2010, he changes that to downloads to the devices. . . so that they don't have to access it later with their credit/debit card. Of course, this was already being done on multiple devices by many manufacturers and carriers before he even filed his "unique and unobvious invention."