Skip to Content

Apple Won't Have to Pay $309M After Judge Accuses Patent Troll of Abusing System to Fleece Tech Companies

Apple today scored a victory in an ongoing patent dispute with Personalized Media Communications (PMC), with the judge overseeing the case tossing out the $308.5 million verdict that Personalized Media Communications won in March, reports Bloomberg.

PMClogonewer
Apple was a victim of PMC's plan to milk the tech industry for high royalties on old ideas, U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap said when delivering the verdict. The judge decided that PMC's patent for digital rights management is unenforceable because the company delayed its application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in an attempt to get more money.

PMC filed hundreds patent applications in the 1980s and 1990s, but no patents were awarded until 2010. The company took advantage of a loophole that allowed for an indefinite application process and then a patent valid for 17 years. This was addressed in 1995, but didn't apply to the patents used against Apple because they were filed earlier.

PMC delayed receiving its patents until after the technology in the patent had already been adopted, letting it make more money from tech companies.

Internal documentation from PMC suggested the company had thought that Apple would be a "natural candidate" to target with delayed patents, along with Intel, IBM, and Microsoft.

PMC won a $308.5 million verdict against Apple in March after a jury said that Apple infringed on DRM patents with its FairPlay technology that is used to distribute encrypted content through iTunes, the App Store, and Apple Music.

Popular Stories

MacBook Neo Feature Pastel 1

First MacBook Neo Benchmarks Are In: Here's How It Compares to the M1 MacBook Air

Thursday March 5, 2026 4:07 pm PST by
Benchmarks for the new MacBook Neo surfaced today, and unsurprisingly, CPU performance is almost identical to the iPhone 16 Pro. The MacBook Neo uses the same 6-core A18 Pro chip that was first introduced in the iPhone 16 Pro, but it has one fewer GPU core. The MacBook Neo earned a single-core score of 3461 and a multi-core score of 8668, along with a Metal score of 31286. Here's how the...
imac video apple feature

Apple Unveils Seven New Products

Friday March 6, 2026 11:48 am PST by
Apple this week unveiled seven products, including an iPhone 17e, an iPad Air with the M4 chip, updated MacBook Air and MacBook Pro models, a new Studio Display, a higher-end Studio Display XDR, and an all-new MacBook Neo that starts at just $599. iPhone 17e features the same overall design as the iPhone 16e, but it gains Apple's A19 chip, MagSafe for magnetic wireless charging and magnetic...
Apple MacBook Pro M4 hero

Apple Planning 'MacBook Ultra' With Touchscreen and Higher Price

Sunday March 8, 2026 8:05 am PDT by
Apple is planning to launch an all-new "MacBook Ultra" model this year, featuring an OLED display, touchscreen, and a higher price point, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reports. Gurman revealed the information in his latest "Power On" newsletter. While Apple has been widely expected to launch new M6-series MacBook Pro models with OLED displays, touchscreen functionality, and a new, thinner design...

Top Rated Comments

60 months ago
Patent trolls are ruining the system for everyone.
Score: 33 Votes (Like | Disagree)
MJaP Avatar
60 months ago
Hopefully this judgement will make a large chunk of PMC's portfolio utterly worthless.
Score: 30 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Apple_Robert Avatar
60 months ago
Sounds like the judge made the right call.
Score: 26 Votes (Like | Disagree)
hot-gril Avatar
60 months ago
A great victory, but there will be more of these guys.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
60 months ago

Put on your thinking cap... where do you think the "patent troll" acquired the patent?
Put on your basic math skills: They came up with these ideas and filed for patents in the late '80s. In the intent of the patent system, and any reasonable fair world, they would have 17 years to use or otherwise monetize their idea and profit from it, so until around 2005.

Instead, they intentionally delayed actually getting the patents until at least 2010, well over 17 years after they publicized the idea in the first place and only once the ideas were in widespread use. At no point between whenever they applied and when the patent was granted two decades later did they actually attempt to develop, market, or otherwise use these ideas for the benefit of society, or themselves. In fact, their entire strategy was to lie low and hope nobody even noticed, eventually developed the same thing independently, and it became widespread.

They did this with the express purpose of extending the patent profit window well past the 17-year limit. Worse, they abused how it worked to patent something that had been developed decades ago, re-developed since, and was already in common use and maybe had been for years. And then they didn't defend it, they waited even longer until a big target started using it so they had someone to cash in on.

They didn't create anything, they gamed the system.

As noted in the article, the USPTO actually closed this loophole 26 years ago, way back in 1995, because they realized it was stupid and open to abuse. But this company started the long con before then so got the con grandfathered in.

All of this is exacerbated by how vague the patent office will allow tech patents to be, so you can patent just about anything, and the only defense for society is that at least it can't extend past 17 years.

It's pretty much a guaranteed recipe for profit: Come up with some either vague or extremely specific tech ideas that aren't currently being used but seem like they might be some day. File for patents on them, then wait however long it takes for them to actually be used. Then wait some more until they're in use by a big, rich company. Finish the patent application process, and sue.

You never built anything, your idea has been public for decades, and you get a huge-money payout for doing nothing but applying for patents on a bunch of ideas that aren't yet usable and playing the waiting game.
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
60 months ago
NOT just a win for Apple, but for ALL Tech Companies that actually produce "something" !
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)