Patent holder Acacia wins $22.1M judgement against Apple

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in General Discussion
A federal jury has ruled in favor of Acacia Research, awarding a subsidiary of the patent licensing firm $22.1 million in damages from Apple for the latter's violation of a cellular networking patent.




Apple was found to have willfully infringed, which could allow U.S. Magistrate Judge Nicole Mitchell to multiply damages by as much as three times, Reuters reported. The news agency didn't say whether Apple is planning to appeal the verdict.

The trial first began on Sept. 6 and ran for a week. Apple attempted to prove that the patent was invalid, but jurors rejected this position.

The company faired better recently in a separate patent suit with VirnetX. Although it was earlier hit with over $625 million in damages, a judge ordered two retrials, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ruled that four VirnetX patents in the case are invalid.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    boopthesnootboopthesnoot Posts: 73member
    Terrible decision.  Apple will appeal and win.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    robmrobm Posts: 1,068member
    If I'm reading this right - Acacia has used a subsidiary to get a judgement. Therefore establishing a precedent. The judgement may be scaled up 3x.
    I'm not clear on American case law but wouldn't that then clear the way for Acacia then to make a full claim for damages ?
    If so, then that's a change in tactics from the patent troll crowd.
  • Reply 3 of 10
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,213member
    Terrible decision.  Apple will appeal and win.
    It may not be worth Apple's time nor money to appeal it. There's not that much at stake and Apple has chosen to pay rather than appeal in some other cases where they've been found to infringe but the awards are relatively minor.
  • Reply 4 of 10
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    magman1979
  • Reply 5 of 10
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    slurpy said:
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    Apple won't unless they decide not to appeal or after appeals are still found to have infringed.

    You do realise that by finding the of wilfully infringing they are basically saying Apple knew of the patent and still went ahead and infringe?
  • Reply 6 of 10
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    singularity said:
    slurpy said:
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    Apple won't unless they decide not to appeal or after appeals are still found to have infringed.

    You do realise that by finding the of wilfully infringing they are basically saying Apple knew of the patent and still went ahead and infringe?
    All of here know that. Many here cannot fathom Apple ever willfully infringing on a patent. It just does not compute. 
  • Reply 7 of 10
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    slurpy said:
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    Apple won't unless they decide not to appeal or after appeals are still found to have infringed.

    You do realise that by finding the of wilfully infringing they are basically saying Apple knew of the patent and still went ahead and infringe?
    All of here know that. Many here cannot fathom Apple ever willfully infringing on a patent. It just does not compute. 
    It's very easy to wilfully infringe a  patent. If you believe that your way doesn't infringe so you go ahead but then your found bam it's wilful infringement. Sometimes it's better not to have known about any other patents in the area but that tends to be an excuse only smaller companies can use.
     I've had projects stopped because the patents guys have come back and said it's a too tight to call wether the process infringes or not.
  • Reply 8 of 10
    sirlance99sirlance99 Posts: 1,293member
    dasanman69 said:
    singularity said:
    slurpy said:
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    Apple won't unless they decide not to appeal or after appeals are still found to have infringed.

    You do realise that by finding the of wilfully infringing they are basically saying Apple knew of the patent and still went ahead and infringe?
    All of here know that. Many here cannot fathom Apple ever willfully infringing on a patent. It just does not compute. 
    Why? Because you think Apple never does anything wrong? Ever? 
    singularity
  • Reply 9 of 10
    ronnronn Posts: 653member
    gatorguy said:

    It may not be worth Apple's time nor money to appeal it. There's not that much at stake and Apple has chosen to pay rather than appeal in some other cases where they've been found to infringe but the awards are relatively minor.
    Doesn't Apple to appeal? Otherwise, they will be guilty of future infringement and the costs will continue to mount. As with the VirnetX case, Apple will probably appeal to have the patents ruled invalid and be done with this company.

    Of course, since it's a relatively small amount for Apple, maybe there'll be a settlement to just get rid of Acacia.
  • Reply 10 of 10
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,213member
    slurpy said:
    So, basically the money that Apple makes in 10 seconds? This will be the end of them. 

    Either way, they shouldn't pay a dime. 
    Apple won't unless they decide not to appeal or after appeals are still found to have infringed.

    You do realise that by finding the of wilfully infringing they are basically saying Apple knew of the patent and still went ahead and infringe?
    All of here know that. Many here cannot fathom Apple ever willfully infringing on a patent. It just does not compute. 
    It's very easy to wilfully infringe a  patent. If you believe that your way doesn't infringe so you go ahead but then your found bam it's wilful infringement. Sometimes it's better not to have known about any other patents in the area but that tends to be an excuse only smaller companies can use.

    I don't think that's been true, at least up until the past few weeks. Having legitimate reasons to believe that some specific patent does not apply to your product or process would generally be sufficient to avoid a finding of willfulness. In recent years "willfulness" has been very difficult to prove.

    With that out of the way SCOTUS issued an opinion in June of this year that changes the requirements yet again and may simplify the process. 
    http://www.devinemillimet.com/articles/2016/proving-willful-patent-infringement-easier

    edited September 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.