Apple ordered to pay VirnetX $503M for infringing patents
A federal jury on Friday calculated Apple owes VirnetX $502.8 million for infringing on the patent holdings company's intellectual property, the latest in a string of verdicts related to the serial filer.
The most recent verdict in Apple's long-running legal war with VirnetX was handed down by a jury hearing the case in the patent holder-friendly U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
VirnetX is brandishing VPN on Demand IP, claiming Apple's FaceTime protocol infringed on the invention. The firm initially asked for $700 million, while Apple argued a more reasonable royalty rate of 19 cents per unit would produce $113 million, reports Bloomberg. The jury landed on 84 cents per unit, the report said.
Apple will appeal the decision.
"We thank the jury for their time and appreciate their consideration but are disappointed with the verdict and plan to appeal," an Apple spokesperson said in a statement to Bloomberg. "This case has been going on for over a decade, with patents that are unrelated to the core operations of our products and have been found to be invalid by the patent office. Cases like this only serve to stifle innovation and harm consumers."
Today's decision follows a partially successful appeal on the case's original $503 million ruling. Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated infringement findings on two patents while upholding two others asserted against iPhone. The case was sent back to Texas.
In March, a separate and slightly different instance of the suit saw Apple pay VirnetX $454 million after a jury found the tech giant culpable for its FaceTime indiscretions.
VirnetX first filed against Apple in 2010, alleging infringement of four patents related to VPN on Demand technology. A federal jury initially ordered Apple to pay $625 million in 2016, but the decision was tossed out by a CAFC judge. That effectively split the case into two retrials, the results of which could cost Apple more than the original decision.
The most recent verdict in Apple's long-running legal war with VirnetX was handed down by a jury hearing the case in the patent holder-friendly U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
VirnetX is brandishing VPN on Demand IP, claiming Apple's FaceTime protocol infringed on the invention. The firm initially asked for $700 million, while Apple argued a more reasonable royalty rate of 19 cents per unit would produce $113 million, reports Bloomberg. The jury landed on 84 cents per unit, the report said.
Apple will appeal the decision.
"We thank the jury for their time and appreciate their consideration but are disappointed with the verdict and plan to appeal," an Apple spokesperson said in a statement to Bloomberg. "This case has been going on for over a decade, with patents that are unrelated to the core operations of our products and have been found to be invalid by the patent office. Cases like this only serve to stifle innovation and harm consumers."
Today's decision follows a partially successful appeal on the case's original $503 million ruling. Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated infringement findings on two patents while upholding two others asserted against iPhone. The case was sent back to Texas.
In March, a separate and slightly different instance of the suit saw Apple pay VirnetX $454 million after a jury found the tech giant culpable for its FaceTime indiscretions.
VirnetX first filed against Apple in 2010, alleging infringement of four patents related to VPN on Demand technology. A federal jury initially ordered Apple to pay $625 million in 2016, but the decision was tossed out by a CAFC judge. That effectively split the case into two retrials, the results of which could cost Apple more than the original decision.
Comments
The idea that Samsung used stalling tactics until the issue became a moot point was just what Apple fans kept telling themselves until they convinced themselves that it was true. The reality is that Samsung came very close to not having to pay Apple a cent just like Microsoft never had to pay Apple a dime over Windows. The only thing that Apple got out of suing Samsung over their early pre-Galaxy S2 devices that didn't sell was a PR narrative with the media that has stuck ever since: that Samsung copies. Basically the media acts as if Apple won anything more than a moral victory over those years of lawsuits, and they actually ignore the many companies that actually do copy the iPhone, iPad and Macbook far more closely ... yet Apple never sues them because they know it won't accomplish the actual goal of ridding the marketplace of the meaningful competition that Android represents (we forget that Android had a tiny market share when Apple AND Microsoft began their lawsuits and threats against Samsung and other Android device makers) so why bother.
HTC chose not to fight Apple in court and instead agreed to pay the licensing fees to Apple. Result: HTC, which was actually the leading Android phone maker before the Galaxy S2 changed the industry, is out of the smartphone business because paying Apple licensing fees left them with no money for the advertising and R&D necessary to compete. Samsung chose to fight it out and look at them now. HTC chose wrong. Had they fought, they would have wound up paying an even smaller pittance than Samsung did at most and very likely would not have had to pay anything at all.
In case you were wondering, the point of my post was Apple has been losing this case for decades and is unlikely to win on appeal as ThinkmanDuv claimed.
Intellectual property is property with value. Sometimes people come up with a great idea, patent it but don't have the means to put it into practice. It doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to reap the rewards and sell the rights to the patent. Apple needs to pay up and move on.
This is like your copier can't send the copy by fax to anyone without paying me. That hit the fan some ago.
Further, the damages award in this case didn't get worse for Apple it got better. It went from a royalty rate of $1.20 per unit to a royalty rate of $0.84 per unit.
But, Apple and others have done just what you're suggesting (they haven't done) in other venues. Some of VirnetX's patent claims, to include all three that Apple was ultimately found to have infringed in this case, have been invalidated by the PTAB based on prior art.