VirnetX Asks for More Money From Apple, Calls on Court to Shut Down FaceTime and iMessage

[bennibeef]

Can someone tell me (not really) why they are not suing:

- Skype (Microsoft)
- Facebook
- Whatsapp
- Telegram
- add the 1 million other companies ..

..where their main product is messaging(with encryption and without) or video calling other than Apple where its part but not their main thing to even market iMessage and FaceTime

I doubt they are licensing it.

 

[Rajani Isa]

Why does it really matter if they make a product that uses their IP? Wouldn't you want to be paid for an idea you had patented that someone else is using?

If the patent shouldn't have been awarded then that is a whole other situation. Did you also know that part of holding a patent is having to defend it or you lose the patent regardless of it's validity?

Are you sure you're not confusing patents with Trademarks? Trademarks have no expiration date, so thus have the trade off of needing to be defended

I wish our worthless justice system would just disband patent trolls already. If you have a legitimate product being copied, then yes, you deserve the money. If not go away! Crooks.

To be fair there are companies that exist because while they can create ideas/patents, they don't have the capital to produce products themselves, and thus license.

But blatant trolls (I don't believe it took them six years to figure out iMessage and Facetime work) should have their patents voided.

 

[btrach144]

Is this company a patent troll or do they actually ship a product that uses the patents that are some how affected by iMessage and FaceTime?

Article claims they are patent holders, which to me implies they are patent trolls. Shame on them. We really need to stop patent trolling. Such a waste of money for everyone.

 

[gaximus]

If you look at their stock price over the last six years, you'll see a trend.

Their stock over the last 6 years pretty much starts at 0 then goes way up then way down. While iMessages usage just keeps going up. I do not see a trend or a correlation

Also I wander what would happen to the carriers if everyone started using text messages again over night.

 

[polaris20]

VirnetX may have mislead patent office clerks in the first place, for which they should be dragged to court.

I'm certainly no patent lawyer, but yeah; the patent office people don't seem to qualified to be granting patents on stuff like this.

 

[rjohnstone]

It was intended to keep people from copying other people's ideas, not to keep people from independently coming up with the same idea. And definitely not to allow folks to charge rent on obvious next step ideas simply by virtue of having filed the paperwork first.

Wrong.
The system is setup as "first to file".
He who files first, gets the patent and all the protections that come with it. They also have to defend it or lose it.

It doesn't matter if you independently come up with the same idea, first to file pretty much always wins unless you can prove obviousness... in which case your patent application would be invalid as well.
And it most definitely allows you to "charge rent" as you call it. It's called licensing and if your "next step" includes the patented "previous step", you most definitely have to pay.
This is why you have to declare prior art in your filing. If that prior art is still within the protection period, you are required by law to get permission to use it in the form of a license.

Are you sure you're not confusing patents with Trademarks? Trademarks have no expiration date,

They most certainly do expire.
Spend some quality time in the USPTO TEAS system and look at all the dead trademarks.
Failure to file paperwork (§8 Declaration) showing continuous use of a mark in commerce is grounds for cancellation of a trademark.
You must file between the 5th and 6th year of first registration and again between the 9th and 10th year after first registration and then every 10th year after that.
Failure to do so will cause the trademark to be cancelled.

 

[MikhailT]

Why does it really matter if they make a product that uses their IP? Wouldn't you want to be paid for an idea you had patented that someone else is using?

If the patent shouldn't have been awarded then that is a whole other situation. Did you also know that part of holding a patent is having to defend it or you lose the patent regardless of it's validity?

Abstract ideas are not patentable. Your idea must be transformative and never been done before and merely converting something into software instruction isn't enough anymore to be patentable thanks to a recent SCOTUS ruling.

In fact, many of the patents that was mentioned in the lawsuit have already been invalidated by the patent office. That's why Apple is seeking for a retrial or mistrial.

Also, you seem to be confusing patent with trademarks, they're not the same thing. You do not have to defend your patents.

Wrong.
The system is setup as "first to file".
He who files first, gets the patent and all the protections that come with it. They also have to defend it or lose it.

It doesn't matter if you independently come up with the same idea, first to file pretty much always wins unless you can prove obviousness... in which case your patent application would be invalid as well.
And it most definitely allows you to "charge rent" as you call it. It's called licensing and if your "next step" includes the patented "previous step", you most definitely have to pay.
This is why you have to declare prior art in your filing. If that prior art is still within the protection period, you are required by law to get permission to use it in the form of a license.

First to file is relatively new in US but common around the world. They only changed it to "First to File" a year or two ago.

Can someone tell me (not really) why they are not suing:

- Skype (Microsoft)
- Facebook
- Whatsapp
- Telegram
- add the 1 million other companies ..

..where their main product is messaging(with encryption and without) or video calling other than Apple where its part but not their main thing to even market iMessage and FaceTime

I doubt they are licensing it.

Microsoft was sued by them and forced to pay $~250m to settle the case.

 

[crsh1976]

Lawyers will be lawyers. Apple's do the same to other companies, even though many here can't admit it apparently.

 

[JosephAW]

Plenty of alternatives. Kik, heytell, WhatsApp, etc

 

[kdarling]

Is this company a patent troll or do they actually ship a product that uses the patents that are some how affected by iMessage and FaceTime?

Unlike a patent troll, this company is made up of some of the people who actually invented the patents, or their close coworkers.

And yes, they do sell code libraries, as well as licenses.

Apple should by (sic) the company,

Many of the shares are owned by the patent inventors themselves, who are the chief officers of VirnetX.

A larger chunk is owned by mutual funds investors. I think the amount of stock available on the open market is less than 50%, and that's all that could be bought easily by Apple. Not enough for a takeover.

Moreover, as soon as Apple bought more than 5%, they'd have to notify the SEC and state their intentions. Which would alert everyone and the stock price would surely skyrocket.

Not to mention that an attempted hostile takeover of a company that's successfully suing you, would probably set off alarms at the DOJ.

What "irreparable" damage has been done to a company most people haven't even heard of until now?

The fact that you, and the other posters who said this, have never heard of VirnetX is utterly meaningless to the case. All it does is point out that you don't work in the same area as SAIC. Ever heard of them?

Can someone tell me (not really) why they are not suing:
- Skype (Microsoft)
...

Microsoft already settled with VirnetX... twice. For a total of around $223 million. As did NEC and Siemens and several others.

That makes it more difficult for Apple's lawyers to try to claim the patents are invalid.

I think some of the other companies you mentioned are also in their cross hairs.

 

[Tech for Kings]

Caused irreparable harm to the company?

Nobody has ever even heard of them. This case is probably giving them more exposure then they ever would get otherwise

Yeah, I think they might be pushing it with the whole "irreparable harm" thing.

 

[macfacts]

Is this company a patent troll or do they actually ship a product that uses the patents that are some how affected by iMessage and FaceTime?

Let's say "patent trolls" were outlawed and made illegal. That would mean only large companies could make use patents and bully little guys. Why? Cause the little guy that invented something and patented it might not be able to do anything with it because he doesn't have a huge bank account to fund production/pay employees or might not be able to get investors, or is good at "inventing" but not business savvy. Is that how you want it?

 

[countryside]

Haha, Apple should pull their iOS app of the App Store.

 

[American Hero]

The fact that you, and the other posters who said this, have never heard of VirnetX is utterly meaningless to the case. All it does is point out that you don't work in the same area as SAIC. Ever heard of them?

The fact that they used the world "irreparable" is quite dramatic.

 

[Michael Goff]

Regardless of what happens with the case, the company is pretty much dead. They should probably sell their assets and give the money back to the shareholders.

 

[tigres]

Did not know a penis company was in the patent business.

 

[fhall1]

I'm certainly no patent lawyer, but yeah; the patent office people don't seem to qualified to be granting patents on stuff like this.

Patent examiners aren't just any schmoe off the street - remember, Albert Einstein started out as a patent clerk.

 

[jonnysods]

I hope they figure it out.

Can't live without imessage!

 

[Shirasaki]

I just checked out their stock. These rulings are making them more money than their entire company is worth.
[doublepost=1464291234][/doublepost]

They've beenid time and time again. At this point, they're just making up for a failed business.

So again, everyone want Apple to pay for them.
"Time for payback!"
Wonder how this would go on. But I think this battle would be a bit more interesting overall.
[doublepost=1464312750][/doublepost]

Caused irreparable harm to the company?

Nobody has ever even heard of them. This case is probably giving them more exposure then they ever would get otherwise

By paying a hefty amount of fee for lawsuit and fire at the largest company in both United States and World?
That costs a lot.
[doublepost=1464313438][/doublepost]

Also I wander what would happen to the carriers if everyone started using text messages again over night.

Then those carriers could charge $1 million/GB for text messaging, at a constant rate.
Oh, no. People will just abandon iMessage and FaceTime, and go to Allo and Duo. Or they can use Facebook Messenger if they like. Or whatsapp, snapchat.

 

[cylack]

Just a perversion of the whole idea that the Constitution was intending to promote. If you don’t use your idea, you shouldn’t get to patent it and sit on it. Any idiot can dream up far-fetched ideas and sit on them for 20 years while progress is made in the field and companies actually invest money and labor in making dreams into reality. A patent troll shouldn’t enjoy the fruit of any of those labors because it just dreamt up a wild idea 20 years ago.

 

[Terrinb]

Why does it really matter if they make a product that uses their IP? Wouldn't you want to be paid for an idea you had patented that someone else is using?

If the patent shouldn't have been awarded then that is a whole other situation. Did you also know that part of holding a patent is having to defend it or you lose the patent regardless of it's validity?

It is not true that you have to defend a patent or loss it. You are thinking of trademarks.

It is a common tactic with trolls to let somebody use an alleged patent for years before suing.

 

[ardent73]

Patent examiners aren't just any schmoe off the street - remember, Albert Einstein started out as a patent clerk.

Albert Einstein started out as a SWISS patent clerk, because he could do a bare minimum of patent related work and spend his time on his physics.

 

[cylack]

That would be fine by me. The days of Edison are long gone. Little guys don’t do jack other than dream up wild ideas and then sue the big guys who do the heavy lifting.

QUOTE="macfacts, post: 22941381, member: 750004"]Let's say "patent trolls" were outlawed and made illegal. That would mean only large companies could make use patents and bully little guys. Why? Cause the little guy that invented something and patented it might not be able to do anything with it because he doesn't have a huge bank account to fund production/pay employees or might not be able to get investors, or is good at "inventing" but not business savvy. Is that how you want it?[/QUOTE]

 

[Macyourdayy]

Translation:

"Your honor, this negotiation would go ever so much better for us if we had Apple by the balls. Can you please hand us Apple's balls on a silver platter?"​

Translation:

"We want to be the spoiled-brat poster child for patent trolls, and we're gonna hold our breath until we turn blue."​

Based on past experience, I'm gonna guess Apple's in the right here. The patent system was intended to give people an incentive to invent new things by granting them exclusive use of their new idea, before others are allowed to copy it. It is being used way too much in the software field for keeping anyone else from taking the obvious next step in many different areas. It was intended to keep people from copying other people's ideas, not to keep people from independently coming up with the same idea. And definitely not to allow folks to charge rent on obvious next step ideas simply by virtue of having filed the paperwork first.

Copying others IP doesn't seem to have slowed Samsung much. I wonder who's actually behind Virtnecks. Follow the money? Has "round things used for transport and machinery" been patented yet?

 

[JimmyHook]

Hopefully Tim Cook buys that company just to burn it to the ground. Idiotic Eastern Texas courts