Apple wins VirnetX patent appeal — but one verdict awaits

Apple has been battling VirnetX in court for over a decade over patents, and on Thursday, the US Court of Appeals handed Apple a victory in the latest skirmish.

In 2010, VirnetX launched a legal dispute by alleging numerous instances of patent infringement related to FaceTime, VPN, and iMessage services. A Texas court fined Apple $368 million in 2012 for violating one patent, but the ruling was overturned almost two years later.

In the most recent update, Apple convinced the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to invalidate the two patents by upholding a decision from the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board, according to Reuters.

It might overturn the $502 million fine that Apple was ordered to pay in 2020. The company separately appealed that verdict, but the Federal Circuit still has to rule in that case.

"If the court upholds the [USPTO's] decision, we have a big problem," VirnetX attorney Jeff Lamken of MoloLamken said at the September hearing. "I don't think we have an enforceable judgment."

The case has gone through numerous appeals and rulings. With the Federal Circuit's decision on Thursday, Apple and VirnetX await a final decision in Apple's appeal of the initial verdict out of East Texas.

VirnetX had separately won a $302 million verdict against Apple in 2016, which was increased to $440 million later on.

9 Comments

lkrupp 19 Years · 10521 comments

About 1 year ago

The other big tech companies know the patent system is corrupt and they don't fight. They pay up, negotiate licenses, whatever they have to do to settle the damn lawsuits. Apple always fights to the bitter end, almost always loses, winds up paying up and negotiating licenses, etc. Why are non-practicing patent trolls allowed to do what they do? As usual, follow the money and lawyer's fees. It's not going to change because lawyers make the laws and they make the laws so they can make money off the laws they make.

mknelson 9 Years · 1148 comments

lkrupp said:

The other big tech companies know the patent system is corrupt and they don't fight. They pay up, negotiate licenses, whatever they have to do to settle the damn lawsuits. Apple always fights to the bitter end, almost always loses, winds up paying up and negotiating licenses, etc. Why are non-practicing patent trolls allowed to do what they do? As usual, follow the money and lawyer's fees. It's not going to change because lawyers make the laws and they make the laws so they can make money off the laws they make.

Technically VirnetX isn't a patent troll any more - they released a video conferencing software in 2022… :D

Anilu_777 8 Years · 579 comments

There should be a law against non practising entities (patent trolls making money off suing others) owning any patents. Only companies that would actually use the patents should be able to purchase them.

chadbag 13 Years · 2029 comments

Anilu_777 said:

There should be a law against non practising entities (patent trolls making money off suing others) owning any patents. Only companies that would actually use the patents should be able to purchase them.

No. This is wrong in so many ways. Property rights are for everyone. Patents are valuable property and lots of small inventors hold patents and need to get paid for their inventions when big companies use them.

I wish the phrase “non practicing entity” were abolished. It is meaningless and has no part in a reasonable discussion on patents and property rights.

A patent is valid or not and by valuable or not, regardless of the status of the invented/owner. Whether they personally implement the patented idea or license it to others.

The real issue is if patents are being issued for things that shouldn’t be patentable.

greginprague 13 Years · 492 comments

chadbag said:

Anilu_777 said:

There should be a law against non practising entities (patent trolls making money off suing others) owning any patents. Only companies that would actually use the patents should be able to purchase them.

No. This is wrong in so many ways. Property rights are for everyone. Patents are valuable property and lots of small inventors hold patents and need to get paid for their inventions when big companies use them.

I wish the phrase “non practicing entity” were abolished. It is meaningless and has no part in a reasonable discussion on patents and property rights.

A patent is valid or not and by valuable or not, regardless of the status of the invented/owner. Whether they personally implement the patented idea or license it to others.

The real issue is if patents are being issued for things that shouldn’t be patentable.

Your “small time inventor who deserves to get paid” story is such a tired joke. Nearly all of these cases are well funded (often private equity) firms who prey on the corpses of dying companies, buying up their patent portfolios for the express purpose of filing frivolous (but very expensive to defend) infringement lawsuits.

The current patent law system that allows this to take place is broken, stifles innovation and hurts owners and shareholders of companies that actually make good products.