Apple's FaceTime workarounds for VirnetX patent suit causing complaints, costs $2.4M per month

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 107
    emacs72emacs72 Posts: 356member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    . . . because Apple did nothing wrong.



     


    in your world view, perhaps, but reality states Apple was found guilty of willful patent infringement.  i suspect Apple will either pay the required license cost or improve on their alternate implementation.

  • Reply 22 of 107
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    scotty321 wrote: »
    These patent trolls need to be stopped.

    Please learn something about the patent system.

    There's no 'patent troll' here. The patent was litigated and found to be valid and infringed. Given that it was valid and infringed, the patent owner has every right to demand payment - and to stop infringement until a deal can be worked out.

    The people whining about 'patent trolls' are the ones who need to be stopped.
  • Reply 23 of 107
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    Buying and sitting on patents just to extort should be stopped.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VirnetX


    except the people who started this company are real engineers who made some real tech while at SAIC. they originally developed it for the CIA and then took the patents they invented and started their own company to license them out

  • Reply 24 of 107
    Oh, shut up. You don't care enough to prove me wrong, don't bother posting. 

    Original threads? You mean from Appleinsider? I imagine he was asking you to provide sources that Apple did not thing wrong from unbiased, non-Apple based sources.
  • Reply 25 of 107
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post


    Apple was found guilty of willful patent infringement.



     


    Appeal.

  • Reply 26 of 107
    Funny how blackmail is illegal but patent trolling is not. Not saying they are exactly the same but both are forms of extortion if you ask me.
  • Reply 27 of 107
    emacs72emacs72 Posts: 356member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Appeal.



     


    Apple has filed an appeal http://www.pcworld.com/article/2043480/apple-appeals-368-million-award-to-virnetx-in-patent-case.html almost two (2) months ago.


     


    In the meantime, the verdict stands: Apple has infringed on patents owned by another company.

  • Reply 28 of 107
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    hezetation wrote: »
    Funny how blackmail is illegal but patent trolling is not. Not saying they are exactly the same but both are forms of extortion if you ask me.

    Since when is enforcing the patents which have been found to be valid and infringed 'trolling' or 'extortion'?

    Obviously, you've never created anything of value or you wouldn't feel so cavalier about someone misappropriating someone else's property.
  • Reply 29 of 107
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ash471 View Post





    You don't understand what a troll is. A troll sues on a patent that is probably not valid but settles for so little it isn't worth putting up the fight. The troll then sues many people to make lots of money.

    This case is no troll. The patent is clearly valid, clearly infringed, and Apple should clearly pay the patent owners fair value.

    Don't be two faced. When Apple sued Samsung we all cheered their win because it was just. Now that Apple is on the other side doesn't mean we should cheer for the innovator to get screwed.


     


     


    You are wrong. Look at a traditional trolls. Mythical trolls hide under a bridge. Once a party crosses the bridge, the troll pops out and demand a toll or else it will kill you. Patent trolls are non practicing entities. They sit quietly by while a company creates a product that arguably infringes on an intentionally vaguely drafted patent.  Once the company's product is successful, the troll sues and threatens an injunction unless a license is taken. This is what this company did. Sat quietly by hoping Apple would violate its vague patent that nobody could find in a search. 


     


    As far as the patent being valid, it is certainly not clear. Cisco was sued at the same time as Apple for violating the same patent in the same way. The Court severed the lawsuit so Apple and Cisco were sued separately.    In a separate trial, Cisco was cleared of violating the patent. The inconsistency makes no sense. Moreover, since the suit was filed the patent system was changed to allow these types of patents to be challenged. 


     


    Apple is appealing the case. Time will tell what happens. 

  • Reply 30 of 107
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    Apple is so doomed ...












    ... NOT.
  • Reply 31 of 107
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,979member
    Appeal.

    True, but that doesn't give them the right to continue the alleged infringement while appealing.
  • Reply 32 of 107
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,979member
    tbell wrote: »

    You are wrong. Look at a traditional trolls. Mythical trolls hide under a bridge. Once a party crosses the bridge, the troll pops out and demand a toll or else it will kill you. Patent trolls are non practicing entities. They sit quietly by while a company creates a product that arguably infringes on an intentionally vaguely drafted patent.  Once the company's product is successful, the troll sues and threatens an injunction unless a license is taken. This is what this company did. Sat quietly by hoping Apple would violate its vague patent that nobody could find in a search. 

    As far as the patent being valid, it is certainly not clear. Cisco was sued at the same time as Apple for violating the same patent in the same way. The Court severed the lawsuit so Apple and Cisco were sued separately.    In a separate trial, Cisco was cleared of violating the patent. The inconsistency makes no sense. Moreover, since the suit was filed the patent system was changed to allow these types of patents to be challenged. 

    Apple is appealing the case. Time will tell what happens. 

    Ever hear of the guy that invented the intermittent windshield wipers? Should his patent be invalidated because he didn't start a car manufacturing company that would make cars with intermittent wipers? Not every patent can be implemented by it's owner. Some ideas are meant to be sold or licensed to other companies.
  • Reply 33 of 107
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member


    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that Apple is quietly negotiating to buy their patents in toto.


     


    For a service that has become core to Apple's iPhone, they won't want to be under the thumb of the IP holder and they may want to be able to leverage ownership of the IP over their competitors in the future.

  • Reply 34 of 107
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member


    never mind.

  • Reply 35 of 107

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    except the people who started this company are real engineers who made some real tech while at SAIC. they originally developed it for the CIA and then took the patents they invented and started their own company to license them out



     


    Speaking from experience, I find it very difficult IP developed for the CIA at SAIC becomes their property, irregardless that they are included in the Patent filings as inventors.

  • Reply 36 of 107
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member


    In principle redesigning their protocol is the correct approach. There are many ways to do a video chat, there's no need to use specific techniques that someone else owns and pay them a fee.

  • Reply 37 of 107
    jragosta wrote: »
    Since when is enforcing the patents which have been found to be valid and infringed 'trolling' or 'extortion'?

    Since 1993, when the term patent troll was created to describe non practicing entities that just sue other companies.
    Would you like to learn more?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll
  • Reply 38 of 107
    adamcadamc Posts: 570member


    In the eastern state of Texas court the patent trolls always win.

  • Reply 39 of 107
    jragosta wrote: »
    scotty321 wrote: »
    These patent trolls need to be stopped.

    Please learn something about the patent system.

    There's no 'patent troll' here. The patent was litigated and found to be valid and infringed. Given that it was valid and infringed, the patent owner has every right to demand payment - and to stop infringement until a deal can be worked out.

    The trolls whining about 'patent trolls' are the ones who need to be stopped.

    They are a troll, Winning doesn't take that away from them. They trolled Cisco and lost. They sue everyone they think they can beat and they alway got to East Texas to try and do that.
  • Reply 40 of 107
    FaceTime works fine for me as well.

    It looks like these guys are just trying to publicize this.
    It will get them nowhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.