Apple Ordered to Pay $625 Million in VirnetX Patent Dispute

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Feb 3, 2016.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    Apple was today found guilty of willfully infringing on four patents in an ongoing dispute with VirnetX and has been ordered to pay $625 million in damages, reports CNBC.

    The patents in question relate to virtual private networking (VPN) protocols and in today's ruling, the jury decided that Apple's FaceTime and iMessages service, along with the iOS devices that support those services, infringe on VirnetX's intellectual property.

    [​IMG]

    The patent dispute between Apple and VirnetX dates back to 2010, with a jury initially awarding VirnetX $368 million in 2012 after Apple was found guilty of infringing on VirnetX patents. That decision was thrown out in September of 2014 after the damages were found to have been incorrectly calculated, but a damages retrial that started last week led to the decision handed down this afternoon.

    VirnetX originally requested $532 million in damages, an amount that grew to $625 million taking into account the willful infringement ruling.

    Ahead of the jury's decision, CNBC says Apple filed a request asking U.S District Judge Robert Schroeder to declare a mistrial, accusing VirnetX of misleading and confusing the jury during its closing arguments. Schroeder has not yet made a ruling on the request.


    Article Link: Apple Ordered to Pay $625 Million in VirnetX Patent Dispute
     
  2. farewelwilliams, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2016

    farewelwilliams macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #2
    Judge Robert Schroeder was a partner at Patton Tidwell Schroeder & Culbertson LLP (now renamed to Patton Tidwell & Culbertson) that reperesents...guess what? you got it: patent-holding companies, a.k.a patent trolls.
     
  3. AFEPPL macrumors 68000

    AFEPPL

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Location:
    England
    #3
    apple do the same thing over patents, now everyone is gunning for them!
     
  4. Asarien macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
  5. HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #5
    Isn't that basically the job description for a trial lawyer?
     
  6. tkukoc macrumors 6502a

    tkukoc

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    USA
    #6
    Doubt they'll ever see any of that money, with a judgement still to be ruled on there will be some sort of behind the scenes deal made.
     
  7. LovingTeddy, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 3, 2016

    LovingTeddy macrumors 6502a

    LovingTeddy

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    Ha-ha... It is nice to see Apple eat their own ****... Suing everyone's ass off and now Apple get sued. Hopefully more company sue Apple and Apple will learn the lesson.
     
  8. crisss1205, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2016

    crisss1205 macrumors 6502a

    crisss1205

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    Well to be fair, Apple actually makes products that use those patents. As far as I know, VirnetX does not make a single product and is essentially a patent troll.
     
  9. HiRez, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 3, 2016

    HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #9
    I'm a big Apple fan and an investor for a not-insignificant amount...and I agree with you. Enough of the lawsuits.
     
  10. SlipperySlop Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    #10
    Apple really does have too much money. They need to give at least 1/2 of it away. Some to charities. Lots to me. There needs to be laws that limit how much money a person or company can have.
     
  11. oneMadRssn macrumors 68030

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #11
    But at some point down the line the patents now asserted by VirnetX were purchased by someone that paid money to a bona-fide inventor. Are you saying inventors that have no interest in licensing or commercializing an idea shouldn't be paid? Are you saying creditors that lend money to start-ups shouldn't be able to recoup their losses when and if those start-ups go bust?

    I'm deff against trolls that bring nuisance suits, trying to extract settlements for less than the cost of litigation. However, clearly VirnetX is not that troll. They were ready and willing to take it all the way, and they did.
     
  12. TouchMint.com macrumors 68000

    TouchMint.com

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Location:
    Phoenix
  13. Rocketman macrumors 603

    Rocketman

    #13
    This is pocket change for AAPL. The question really is why didn't the plaintiff settle and agree with Apple who is known as an IP advocate and willing licensee in "most" cases? Will we ever know?

    I suppose the bigger issue is if the winner is willing to take the cash offshore so AAPL doesn't have to pay double taxation to satisfy the judgement.
     
  14. Swift macrumors 65816

    Swift

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #14
    They'll need to save money to buy a big piece of Tesla.
     
  15. Karma*Police macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    #15
    So sad. If this company's sales were hurt by Apple's infringement, that's one thing, but they don't sell any products which is what makes this patent troll situation so criminal.

    The patent system is clearly broken, but I feel like patent trolls is one aspect of it that can be addressed relatively easily... and should be addressed because they produce absolutely nothing and increase the cost of doing business which ultimately gets passed on to consumers.
     
  16. mistasopz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    #16
    Apple copying and stealing like usual. They're just as bad as Samsung.
     
  17. avanpelt macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #17
    Seriously? Just out of curiosity, what's the "too much money" threshold, in your opinion?
     
  18. rdlink macrumors 68040

    rdlink

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Location:
    Out of the Reach of the FBI
    #18
    There you are! I was wondering where the absolute final arbiter of who has too much money and who doesn't have enough was. Thanks for coming forward.
     
  19. Swift macrumors 65816

    Swift

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #19
    Patents should be valid only as long as the actual inventor is alive. They should be licensed-- in the case of virtual networks, as FRAND -- but not bought. They're meant to reward invention, not speculation and patent trolling.
     
  20. rdlink macrumors 68040

    rdlink

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Location:
    Out of the Reach of the FBI
    #20
    Assuming Apple will ever pay that judgment, Tim Cook could probably pull it out of his top desk drawer.
     
  21. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #21
    An ironic statement coming from Karma*Police
     
  22. macs4nw, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 3, 2016

    macs4nw macrumors 68040

    macs4nw

    #22
    It's not over till the fat lady sings but, with the benefit of hindsight, that 2012 award of $368 million looks good now, however I doubt Tim is losing much sleep over this. Business as usual. To varying degrees, it's a game they all play.
     
  23. Yuck9, Feb 3, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 3, 2016

    Yuck9 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Location:
    California
    #23
    Agreed.
     
  24. Bubba Satori macrumors 601

    Bubba Satori

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Location:
    B'ham
    #24
    Why?
    How much money should they have?
     
  25. rdlink macrumors 68040

    rdlink

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Location:
    Out of the Reach of the FBI
    #25
    Pet Peeve: Can we please stop saying that someone is "guilty" of something in a civil suit? Guilty is a term that is used in criminal proceedings.

    Civil litigants are held liable for damages to the complainant.
    --- Post Merged, Feb 3, 2016 ---
    Because it's not his.
     

Share This Page