Apple Ordered to Pay $368 M in FaceTime Patent Suit Loss

[zakislam]

Court loss may lead to more bans for some of its most popular devices.

Apple Ordered to Pay $368 M in FaceTime Patent Suit Loss : Read more

 

[g00fysmiley]

as much as i like to see apple get patent trolled like they do to everybody else... some of these companies that exist like rambus just to patent ideas and make royalties are bad for the consumer in the end as they pay for it... i don't knwo enough about vernetX to say if they are that kind of company but tha tthey also have a large suit won from m$ and m$ didn't just buy them out makes me suspect that they are

 

[julianbautista87]

LOL.

 

[ohim]

Patents ... making lazy bastards rich bastards ... even though i hate Apple to the bone ... is not fair that some random ass company that holds a patent to something and does nothing with the ideea to get rich on the back of other companies that actually do something with those ideeas.

 

[Rosanjin]

I usually groan whenever I see a patent lawsuit headline, due to the rampant patent-trolling and flagrant displays of the "monopolization by litigation" attitude.

That said, I think this is one of the increasingly rare cases where the system is doing its job correctly. Good for VirnetX, since it seems they were truly victimized by several big boy companies who thought they would get away with it unscathed.

 

[Guest]

What goes around...

 

[razor512]

why cant they do a patent clensing where every patent currently on record is looked at and if the patent holder has had the patent for longer than 5 years and has no product being sold or produced that uses the patent, then the patent becomes blacklisted and anyone can use the idea and no one can ever patent it again.


additional details
Imagine this, if you file a patent, you have 1 year to show product (eg a prototype) that implements the patent, then after that, you have 5 years to to produce a final product or at least have a beta unit with plans finalized to bring the product to market.
Those rules can then be retroactively applied to all patents and patents that do not fit in the rules are blacklisted.

This will mostly get rid of patent trolls and also put more on the line for companies that simply want to pstent something that is done now but with a future technology so that the moment someone else makes the actual product, they can sue them.

 

[castle songbird]

[citation][nom]Rosanjin[/nom]I usually groan whenever I see a patent lawsuit headline, due to the rampant patent-trolling and flagrant displays of the "monopolization by litigation" attitude.That said, I think this is one of the increasingly rare cases where the system is doing its job correctly. Good for VirnetX, since it seems they were truly victimized by several big boy companies who thought they would get away with it unscathed.[/citation]


You know nothing about the specifics of how much of an accomplishment developing the technology in question was. Whether it was a unique approach that the programmers at apple would never have thought of or been able to develop otherwise or just the next logical step in network unification and it never should of been patented in the first place is not clear from the article. Your making assumptions.

 

[COLGeek]

Profits through litigation. The business model of the 21st century. Sad.

 

[bllue]

All patent trolls should fight against king patent troll, Apple.

 

[spookyman]

[citation][nom]g00fysmiley[/nom]as much as i like to see apple get patent trolled like they do to everybody else... some of these companies that exist like rambus just to patent ideas and make royalties are bad for the consumer in the end as they pay for it... i don't knwo enough about vernetX to say if they are that kind of company but tha tthey also have a large suit won from m$ and m$ didn't just buy them out makes me suspect that they are[/citation]

Why because they want to get paid for their patented idea? Apple would have sued them if they stole one of their ideas.

 

[jake2447]

LOL Apple sucks

 

[Rosanjin]

[citation][nom]castle songbird[/nom]You know nothing about the specifics of how much of an accomplishment developing the technology in question was. Whether it was a unique approach that the programmers at apple would never have thought of or been able to develop otherwise or just the next logical step in network unification and it never should of been patented in the first place is not clear from the article. Your making assumptions.[/citation]

Interesting. Did you just make an assumption about my personal knowledge of the various VirnetX litigations - and then berate me for making an assumption? You might want to rethink that.

Helpful tip: Learn the difference between "your" and "you're".

Have a nice day. ^ ^

 

[BoredErica]

It's not fair that people make patents and get paid tons? If it's that simple, why don't YOU patent some stuff? You can be the rich guy.

 

[webbwbb]

[citation][nom]Razor512[/nom]why cant they do a patent clensing where every patent currently on record is looked at and if the patent holder has had the patent for longer than 5 years and has no product being sold or produced that uses the patent, then the patent becomes blacklisted and anyone can use the idea and no one can ever patent it again.additional detailsImagine this, if you file a patent, you have 1 year to show product (eg a prototype) that implements the patent, then after that, you have 5 years to to produce a final product or at least have a beta unit with plans finalized to bring the product to market. Those rules can then be retroactively applied to all patents and patents that do not fit in the rules are blacklisted.This will mostly get rid of patent trolls and also put more on the line for companies that simply want to pstent something that is done now but with a future technology so that the moment someone else makes the actual product, they can sue them.[/citation]

The issue with this idea is that there are legitimate companies that only do R&D but never produce anything, ARM is a prime example. They do not produce anything and don't even contract their work to other companies, instead they do research and license that work to others. While there is certainly a problem with the current patent system, any alternative plan will be difficult to work out without severely impacting legitimate, non-abusing businesses and individuals.

 

[jaber2]

I have nothing to contribute, this is yet another patent law suite result.

 

[chewy1963]

[citation][nom]webbwbb[/nom]The issue with this idea is that there are legitimate companies that only do R&D but never produce anything, ARM is a prime example. They do not produce anything and don't even contract their work to other companies, instead they do research and license that work to others. While there is certainly a problem with the current patent system, any alternative plan will be difficult to work out without severely impacting legitimate, non-abusing businesses and individuals.[/citation]

Exactly +1, people don't understand that there is no simple fix for the patent system. Many seem to think some far sweeping law would solve everything and that is simply not the case.

 

[house70]

Old news. Read about this the other day. Probably took Zak a while to wipe the tears off his cheeks.

Seriously though, this could have been avoided if Apple had bought the license from them. Given that Apple doesn't like to pay fair share for other's licenses (see Motorola case), it doesn't surprise me a bit.

 

[bigdog44]

Those poor factory workers are gonna take the brunt of all this...

 

[goodegg]

*plink*

That's the sound of the drop in the bucket that will be that check.

 

[Darkk]

Another bad Apple?

 

[pythy]

In the words of Nelson Muntz: "Ha Ha!"

 

[Cons29]

as much as i hate patent trolls, and i dont have much knowledge about this one, but from my impression at least this one is not some rectangular shape with rounded corners.

 

[Cons29]

as much as i hate patent trolls, and i dont have much knowledge about this one, but from my impression at least this one is not some rectangular shape with rounded corners.

 

[Cons29]

as much as i hate patent trolls, and i dont have much knowledge about this one, but from my impression at least this one is not some rectangular shape with rounded corners.