New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Ordered to Pay $625 Million in VirnetX Patent Dispute

Apple was today found guilty of willfully infringing on four patents in an ongoing dispute with VirnetX and has been ordered to pay $625 million in damages, reports CNBC.

The patents in question relate to virtual private networking (VPN) protocols and in today's ruling, the jury decided that Apple's FaceTime and iMessages service, along with the iOS devices that support those services, infringe on VirnetX's intellectual property.

virnetx
The patent dispute between Apple and VirnetX dates back to 2010, with a jury initially awarding VirnetX $368 million in 2012 after Apple was found guilty of infringing on VirnetX patents. That decision was thrown out in September of 2014 after the damages were found to have been incorrectly calculated, but a damages retrial that started last week led to the decision handed down this afternoon.

VirnetX originally requested $532 million in damages, an amount that grew to $625 million taking into account the willful infringement ruling.

Ahead of the jury's decision, CNBC says Apple filed a request asking U.S District Judge Robert Schroeder to declare a mistrial, accusing VirnetX of misleading and confusing the jury during its closing arguments. Schroeder has not yet made a ruling on the request.


Tag: VirnetX


Top Rated Comments

(View all)

11 months ago

apple do the same thing over patents, now everyone is gunning for them!

Well to be fair, Apple actually makes products that use those patents. As far as I know, VirnetX does not make a single product and is essentially a patent troll.
Rating: 51 Votes
11 months ago
Judge Robert Schroeder was a partner at Patton Tidwell Schroeder & Culbertson LLP (now renamed to Patton Tidwell & Culbertson) that reperesents...guess what? you got it: patent-holding companies, a.k.a patent trolls.
Rating: 37 Votes
11 months ago

Good. Apple has too much money, anyway.


There you are! I was wondering where the absolute final arbiter of who has too much money and who doesn't have enough was. Thanks for coming forward.
Rating: 23 Votes
11 months ago
Pet Peeve: Can we please stop saying that someone is "guilty" of something in a civil suit? Guilty is a term that is used in criminal proceedings.

Civil litigants are held liable for damages to the complainant.
[doublepost=1454542370][/doublepost]

Why?


Because it's not his.
Rating: 13 Votes
11 months ago

Good. Apple has too much money, anyway.


Why?
How much money should they have?
Rating: 13 Votes
11 months ago

Good. Apple has too much money, anyway.


Seriously? Just out of curiosity, what's the "too much money" threshold, in your opinion?
Rating: 12 Votes
11 months ago
Ha-ha... It is nice to see Apple eat their own ****... Suing everyone's ass off and now Apple get sued. Hopefully more company sue Apple and Apple will learn the lesson.
Rating: 12 Votes
11 months ago

But at some point down the line the patents now asserted by VirnetX were purchased by someone that paid money to a bona-fide inventor. Are you saying inventors that have no interest in licensing or commercializing an idea shouldn't be paid? Are you saying creditors that lend money to start-ups shouldn't be able to recoup their losses when and if those start-ups go bust?

I'm deff against trolls that bring nuisance suits, trying to extract settlements for less than the cost of litigation. However, clearly VirnetX is not that troll. They were ready and willing to take it all the way, and they did.


Patents should be valid only as long as the actual inventor is alive. They should be licensed-- in the case of virtual networks, as FRAND -- but not bought. They're meant to reward invention, not speculation and patent trolling.
Rating: 11 Votes
11 months ago

Well to be fair, Apple actually makes products that use those patents. As far as I know, VirnetX does not make a single patent and is essentially a patent troll.


But at some point down the line the patents now asserted by VirnetX were purchased by someone that paid money to a bona-fide inventor. Are you saying inventors that have no interest in licensing or commercializing an idea shouldn't be paid? Are you saying creditors that lend money to start-ups shouldn't be able to recoup their losses when and if those start-ups go bust?

I'm deff against trolls that bring nuisance suits, trying to extract settlements for less than the cost of litigation. However, clearly VirnetX is not that troll. They were ready and willing to take it all the way, and they did.
Rating: 11 Votes
11 months ago
Apple copying and stealing like usual. They're just as bad as Samsung.
Rating: 11 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]