Apple denied new VirnetX FaceTime patent trial

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 8
After a battery of appeals, the Apple versus VirnetX legal battle over FaceTime patents appears to be finally over, with the judge at the heart of the case denying Apple's motion for a new trial.

Credit: Apple
Credit: Apple


Robert W. Schroeder III denied Apple's motion for a new trial in the ongoing FaceTime patent misuse trial saga on Wednesday. In a parallel ruling, the judge also granted, but modified VirnetX's motion for interest payments and other fees assessed to Apple.

The order on Wednesday is sealed. At present, it isn't clear what modifications Judge Schroeder made to VirnetX's $116 million request for interest on top of the $504 million that it must pay.

Apple was seeking a new trial on the grounds that the jury had not been informed that two of VirnetX's patents had been rendered invalid by the US Patent Office. The company also argued that the award for royalties was erroneous, and if there was going to be any royalty award, it should be $0.19 per device versus the $0.84 per unit sale that VirnetX was demanding.

In February 2020, Apple's appeal regarding the invalid patents was denied.

In March 2020, VirnetX confirmed that Apple sent a $454 million payment for infringing several of its patents through the FaceTime and VPN on Demand features.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 7
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    I was going to say “can’t win ‘em all.”  

    But it’s probably more a case of “can’t win one.”

    CloudTalkinwatto_cobraroundaboutnow
  • Reply 2 of 7
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    Apple was seeking a new trial on the grounds that the jury had not been informed that two of VirnetX's patents had been rendered invalid by the US Patent Office.


    I’m confused. Does this mean Apple’s legal team screwed up, or were the patents invalidated after the original case?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 7
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    I have another question. 

    Wasn’t it these patents that stopped them making FaceTime cross-platform?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 7
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,162member
    Rayz2016 said:
    I have another question. 

    Wasn’t it these patents that stopped them making FaceTime cross-platform?
    No one has the answer outside of Apple themselves and they've never commented on it AFAIK.
  • Reply 5 of 7
    Does it really matter? FaceTime was a failure from the very start. Apple could have been Zoom or Skype but they had to be proprietary and limit the users to only iPhones. I think I have used FaceTime once since it was released (and not out of spite, it simply never was needed.)
  • Reply 6 of 7
    danoxdanox Posts: 599member
    Does it really matter? FaceTime was a failure from the very start. Apple could have been Zoom or Skype but they had to be proprietary and limit the users to only iPhones. I think I have used FaceTime once since it was released (and not out of spite, it simply never was needed.)
    Pure Trumpery....
  • Reply 7 of 7
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    danox said:
    Does it really matter? FaceTime was a failure from the very start. Apple could have been Zoom or Skype but they had to be proprietary and limit the users to only iPhones. I think I have used FaceTime once since it was released (and not out of spite, it simply never was needed.)
    Pure Trumpery....
    Here’s the iMore take:

    https://www.imore.com/wheres-facetime-android

    Quite possible that the patent forced Apple to go through relay servers. If that’s the case then it would be hellishly expensive to run FaceTime cross-platform. 
Sign In or Register to comment.