Switching to WHAT? VirnetX won a $200,000,000 settlement from Microsoft before filing suit against Apple on the same patents they asserted against Microsoft. . . patents they don't actually use. They are a "non-practicing entity." Are you aware that they sued Apple because Apple licensed the chips from Cisco that provided the networking. Apple insisted in court they DO NOT USE the technology claimed by VirnetX, using another approach to accomplish a similar result, and Apple showed what they and Cisco used, but the jury awarded the judgment anyway. The ruling is under appeal. In March of 2013, VirnetX LOST their suit against Cisco when Cisco proved their chips—the Cisco ICs that Apple uses—DID NOT USE VirnetX's patented technology at all, showing the the court and jury the same evidence and testimony used in the Apple case. Well, what do you know? Is it possible the Jury made a mistake in the Apple case?
Oh. . . GEE! burghguy, Nothing was stolen, except perhaps by some low information stupid jurors in the plaintiff friendly East Texas "Rocket Docket" Federal Court who decided to be "generous" with the "big bad rich company Goliath's money" and gave it to the "poor little business David." VirnetX's attorney couched it in terms of David versus Goliath.
To claim Apple is "the worst thief," in light of Microsoft's history and convictions, is ludicrous. . . especially when your high dudgeon is based on a case based on false claims. It's interesting the Microsoft admitted their approach did indeed use VirnetX tech and admitted they WERE indeed infringing, continuing a long term practice Microsoft has been known for. . . and agreed to pay $200 million. . . Yet you blame Apple?!?!?
That was the case VirnetX's attorney's argued in the Apple case, claiming that "If Microsoft admitted infringing our four patents, then Apple must be,as well! Make them pay us!"—ignoring the fact Microsoft did it in software while Apple's was in licensed Cisco hardware—but that argument was what the jurors heard and believed. But it wasn't true.
Nor is your claim of Apple being the "worst thief of all the technology companies" true. As a matter of indisputed fact, except perhaps by you, Apple is known in the industry for licensing every technology it uses. . . or outright buying the company and/or patents. That also is the truth. . . and they often buy them years in advance. Look at the licensing of the world-wide rights to all uses of LiquidMetal in Electronics. Think about it. The patents VirnetX asserted were acquired for under a million dollars. . . quite a bit under. If Apple needed these patents, don't you think with the amount they spend on buying and licensing patents, they could have outbid the guys setting up a non-practicing entity holding company intended to hold-up companies who ACTUALLY DO THINGS? Of course they could, and would have. Apple does not take those kind of risks. . . and you cannot truthfully show they've stolen tech. Urban legends and myths abound, but the facts don't support the propaganda when pulled out into the light of day.
Spoken like a true Apple cultist. Steve Jobs was notorious for stealing technology and it continues to this day. Cisco’s attorney confused the jury and was able to get a verdict that their hardware did not infringe, but the jury also found that VHC’s patents were not invalid. And here’s something interesting - - Cisco did not appeal that part of the decision. Cisco will eventually license VHC technology, which was designed by SAIC for the government to insure secure connections. Apple’s entire operating system, and especially FaceTime and iMessage, use VHC technology, and Apple’s feeble attempts at a workaround by using relay servers caused thousand of complaints before they stopped using it. Apple said at the hearing that they could do a workaround for less than $2 million and it would take several weeks. That was a bold faced lie which reduced the damages awarded at trial. Judge Davis recognized the lie (Apple later admitted it had spent much more for Akimai servers and was not close to a viable workaround) and penalized Apple for their dishonesty by increasing the royalty significantly. The CAFC is going to affirm the trial judge and then Apple will continue its delay tactics by seeking an en banc appeal and ultimately a shot at the Supreme Court, but they will lose because THEY ARE THIEVES. By the way, VHC has licensed their technology to 6 companies, all of which were stealing it prior to being sued. Microsoft is stealing VHC technology for Skype services but will soon have to pay up. VHC is not a NPE. The have available for purchase several apps to implement their technology, but why pay for something you can steal? Steve Jobs, may he burn in hell, stole everything that crossed his path. I will give you the fact that he was able to bring things to market in a way that made people want to buy, but he was a thief nonetheless.