Posted on 05/26/2016 12:39:43 PM PDT by Swordmaker
Infamous patent troll VirnetX has formally asked a Texas court this week to order Apple to stop providing its FaceTime and iMessage features to customers. The request follows VirnetX’s victory in court earlier this year to the tune of $625 million, which the firm wants to see increased by $190 million or more, Law360 reports:
At a post-trial hearing Wednesday, Texas technology company VirnetX argued that although an injunction blocking Apple’s popular video chatting and messaging features, along with a virtual private network on demand feature, may seem like a harsh remedy, it is necessary because of the irreparable harm Apple’s infringement caused the company. VirnetX also asked the court to increase the jury’s damages award by at least $190 million, arguing that Apple has been the “poster child” for unreasonable litigation tactics.
The patent fight between Apple and VirnetX over FaceTime and iMessage dates back to a 2012 ruling when Apple was ordered to pay $368.2 million in damages. That ruling was eventually thrown out, however, and a retrial followed earlier this year in which VirnetX requested $523 million in damages after Apple continued offering FaceTime and iMessage.
While VirnetX is now asking the court to block FaceTime and iMessage entirely and asking for even more money in damages, Apple is seeking a mistrial and an end to ongoing royalties:
Meanwhile, Apple argued that in light of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office decisions rejecting the four patents-in-suit, an injunction would be inappropriate, as would any ongoing royalty based on FaceTime, iMessage and virtual private network on demand features. The tech giant also sought a mistrial based on a purportedly inappropriate argument to the jury and argued that the company is entitled to a judgment of noninfringement, despite the jury verdict, based on VirnetX’s allegedly insufficient evidence.
VirnetX has similarly sought financial reward from other tech companies including Microsoft, which it reached a $200 million agreement with over the same complaint. VirnetX acquired the patent that it has based its complaint on in 2007 after it was originally filed in the late 90s. As ever, we’ll continue tracking the patent litigation, but I have a feeling Apple isn’t letting FaceTime or iMessage go away anytime soon. Apple’s video and messaging services between its devices have become even more crucial during the debate on privacy and surveillance in recent years.
Apple should agree to shut down all these services.
Then they should tell the impacted users to contact their Congresscritter and request reforms to the patent laws.
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
An inventor and patent holder is not a “troll”.
VirnetX is a spin off of SAIC.
SAIC developed the secure communications used by the CIA and similar agencies. VirnetX was spun off in order to offer these same secure communications to the private sector.
Apple, instead of paying VirnetX for the use of these products, simply decided to steal them. They have been found guilty in an Article 3 court of this theft.
Apple is trying to outlast VirnetX’s ability to survive an endless round of appeals and PTAB reviews. If VirnetX runs out of cash then Apple’s strategy of IP theft will win out.
Why? The US Patent Office has already invalidated all four patents in suit. VirnetX is trying to hold up Apple using INVALID PATENTS merely because an ignorant jury in East Texas found against Apple in the trial because they could not understand the very technical issues in the suit. Apple was in the process of appealing the judgement when the USPTO invalidated the in suit patents completely so the process was never completed. VirnetX is trying to go back to the original well for MORE money and an injunction using invalidated patents. Absurdity upon absurdity.
The judge in the case, if he is at all interested in justice, should vacate the decision.
I am no Apple fanboy as Sword can attest, but this company are notorious trolls and all 4 patents were invalidated. Why should Apple pay?
Apple has said all along that it does not use these protocols in FaceTime, imessaging, or Instant VPN. The tried to explain what they did use instead to the jury, whose members did not understand the different technologies.
The software developed was done under contract for the US Government and by rights belongs to the CIA or NSA. It is NOT the property of SAIC (admitted to in court documents) as a public domain but constrained development. Therefore they do not have clear title to the patents.
Apple is not trying to outlast VirnetX as VirnetX has already been awarded $200 million on this from Microsoft in a settlement because Microsoft blinked. They have the funds. You don't know what you are talking about.
Finally, the US patent office has INVALIDATED ALL FOUR PATENTS. They are not valid as an obvious development.
“Why? The US Patent Office has already invalidated all four patents in suit.”
Learn the law, fanboy. The patents were found valid and infringed in an Article 3 court. An executive agency cannot overthrow the decision of an Article 3 court.
Apple has long employed a practice of stealing intellectual property and defying the inventors to get paid. It is a consistent business strategy using delay in the courts to assist theft. VirnetX is far from Apple’s first time.
If Apple developed their own code to do these functions, or bought the code from some vendor, then the litigating company should have to pay for their frivolous lawsuit, preferably Chinese style.
This crap of patenting concepts, then suing to bleed money from productive companies and people needs to be stopped.
The court should just tell the claimant, "sit down and write the code you claim was stolen." If the claimant cannot recreate any significant amount of the code he/she claims was "stolen", just take them out back and dispatch them Chinese style. Enough.
And I really hate Apple -- I just hate these thieves-by-patent-or-copyright worse.
“Apple has said all along that it does not use these protocols in FaceTime, imessaging, or Instant VPN. The tried to explain what they did use instead to the jury, whose members did not understand the different technologies. “
Lol, Apple lied and got caught! What part of that don’t you understand?
The Rocket Docket in East Texas is the most sophisticated patent court in the country. Your precious Apple is a den of IP thieves, something very well known in the tech industry.
The only question now is whether or not Apple can game the appeals and IPR system to drag this out longer than VirnetX can survive.
“Finally, the US patent office has INVALIDATED ALL FOUR PATENTS. They are not valid as an obvious development”
You don’t know the case, you don’t know what you are spouting off about, you’re just repeating Apple press releases.
“This crap of patenting concepts, then suing to bleed money from productive companies and people needs to be stopped. “
It’s not “a concept”, it’s sophisticated software. And since when is intellectual property no longer considered property?
Apple has a long reputation of either licensing or outright buying the intellectual property it uses, not stealing it. You are mistaking Apple for Microsoft's business model.
You started your rebuttal to me with an insulting slur which demonstrates you have no facts. The facts are that Apple demonstrated in court they used alternative tech to VirnetX's claimed technology.
“Apple has a long reputation of either licensing or outright buying the intellectual property it uses, not stealing it. You are mistaking Apple for Microsoft’s business model. “
They both do it. VirnetX successfully sued MSFT over the same issue. See if you can figure out what this says. It is still in effect;
Apple is simply using the delay of appeals and IPR to try to outlast VirnetX’s ability to stay solvent. They have done this before with other small firms. Inventors have been badly disadvantaged by the America Invents Act which has opened the door to widespread theft by large corporations like Apple. This is Apple’s corporate strategy. It’s IP theft.
“I am no Apple fanboy as Sword can attest, but this company are notorious trolls and all 4 patents were invalidated. “
Because they weren’t invalidated, they were found valid and infringed in an Article 3 court and that decision stands.
Apple fools those of you who don’t know the law by conflating the request for an IPR review by the PTAB with decisions by a US District Court. It’s a PR campaign aimed at manipulating public perception.
VirnetX developed and owns the patents to the IP that Apple has been stealing. Apple is gaming the court and PTAB system to see if they can drag this out longer than VirnetX can survive.
I do know the case and followed it closely.
“I do know the case and followed it closely.”
Really?
Then explain how it is that you don’t know the very basic fact that all four patents were found valid and infringed in the Rocket Docket and that that decision stands.
How did you manage to get that part completely backwards, what with your extensive knowledge and all?
Then the person claiming creator's rights should be able to demonstrate such creation by reproducing some of that creation in front of a judge and jury. Otherwise, the claimant also "stole" it. And they should be able to show what portion of that code is in Apple's code.
Who has the copyright or patent on: Move A to B? That is just how silly all these infringement suits are.
Stop pretending that that one Texas court that is notorious for big unjustified awards is the end of this.
Cases go there because the locals are inbred rejects who love sticking it to the fat cats!
“Then the person claiming creator’s rights should be able to demonstrate such creation by reproducing some of that creation in front of a judge and jury. “
They did, genius. That’s why Apple lost the case. Do you clowns ever do anything other than read and repeat Apple fanboy crap? Why do you think Apple lost? Bad luck?
Keep telling yourself that. I guess in your world Apple’s lawyers were too incompetent to get the trial moved somewhere other than hayseed land.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.