back to article Why so glum, VMware? It's Friday. Oh, is it this $235m patent infringement invoice from Densify? Too bad, so sad

VMware is set to find itself a little lighter in the wallet after losing a nearly quarter-billion dollar patent-infringement case. A jury in a US federal district court in eastern Delaware on Friday found in favor of Densify, and against the Dell-owned IT giant, in legal battle over basic concepts of virtualization. In doing …

  1. Roland6 Silver badge

    US Patent 8,209,687 & 9,654,367

    Allowing for the patentese, these do seem to be a rather clear, precise and technically detailed patent.

    1. Mage Silver badge

      Re: US Patent 8,209,687 & 9,654,367

      It's been infringed, but it should never have been awarded.

      What is patentable in the USPTO is crazy.

      1. Muira

        Re: US Patent 8,209,687 & 9,654,367

        You mean like the patent for a method of swinging on a swing that has just expired? https://patents.google.com/patent/US6368227B1/en

    2. John Geek
      Facepalm

      Re: US Patent 8,209,687 & 9,654,367

      I glazed over trying to read the patent, but it seems to be describing a rather basic P2V, something vmware had 15+ years ago, which surely predates this patent ?

  2. Snowy
    Coat

    Funny

    I do find it rather funny that US8,209,687 B2 references Vmware 43 times in their document.

    1. NorthIowan
      Facepalm

      Re: Funny

      And Vmware has 20 patents that reference it. Maybe someone should have thought about cross licensing? It's not like Vmware can say they didn't know about it.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Funny

        > And Vmware has 20 patents that reference it.

        This begs the other question: if they weren't going to cross licence then why didn't they have a prepared case demonstrating why they didn't need to licence.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Funny

          "This begs the other question: if they weren't going to cross licence then why didn't they have a prepared case demonstrating why they didn't need to licence."

          My reading of the patent is that there is nothing innovative - it is basically "this stuff you do while monitoring a physical server? We're going to document a method of doing this for VIRTUAL servers"

          Would you cross-licence that functionality?

          I'm not commenting on the US Patent offices willingness to award patents and let lawyers sort out the details...

  3. This post has been deleted by its author

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    New USPTO patent

    I've just patented Impeachment now I own it I'm going to sue the damnocrats

    - D Trump

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: New USPTO patent

      sad

  5. Iceberg86300

    Just saw in another article that they were also hit with trademark infringement for describing something as "yadda yadda yadda allowing the densifying of yadda yadda yadda." Basically, used exactly as how it sounds: increase the density of some feature or performance metric.

    Densify is in the dictionary & has nothing to do with IT. It's a treatment for wood to increase its, you guessed it, density.

    How in the *+$? did they trademark a word that literally predates their very existence? Patents are one thing, but this is absolutely ridiculous.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021