back to article Decade-old patent battle goes Apple's way

On Thursday an appeals court upheld a ruling in favor of Apple, in a $503 million patent case with Nevada-based security software and technology vendor VirnetX that has been ongoing for thirteen years. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which had deemed " …

  1. TRT Silver badge

    Why has no-one patented patent-trolling yet?

    1. John Robson Silver badge

      Too much prior art for even the patent office to ignore.

    2. b0llchit Silver badge

      Dear sir,

      You are infringing on my patent the patent trolling patent. You are ordered to pay me a fee of $1500 for your use of the patent the patent trolling patent technology.

      Sincerely, Patently Troll Patent

      1. Michael Hoffmann Silver badge

        Stan: and my patent's patent's patent's patent

        Reg: ...

        Stan and my patent's patent's patent's patent's patent

        Reg: shut up!

        (only one icon I could use here)

  2. Long John Silver

    A plague on both their houses

    I suppose this enriches deserving lawyers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: A plague on both their houses

      How to get rich in the corporate USA:

      1) Nick someone elses idea and then re-badge it/tart it up and make it look like your own original idea, have it made cheaply and sell lots of them.


      2) Find a firm who have invented something fantastic but needs licensed customers. Buy some of their tech and after a while cancel all your orders, watch their stock price plummet and then buy them up for $1


      3) Become a lawyer working for any of the above companies and wait until the legal disputes start and your income from professional fees start mounting up.

  3. DS999 Silver badge

    Earlier this week

    Either yesterday or the day before, I saw an article about VirnetX stock surging because of reports the CEO was expecting a ruling in their favor. Then it gave back most of its gains later in the day.

    I hope the SEC investigates and sees if there was some insider trading going on there. Seems mighty suspicious that this movement happens a day or two before the ruling is released. I wonder if VirnetX had an insider in the court who told them they were going to lose, so they put out rumors that they were going to win so they could cash in before their stock fell with the announcement of the ruling.

    1. Paul Herber Silver badge

      Re: Earlier this week

      Do people do things like that?

      1. J. Cook Silver badge

        Re: Earlier this week

        Does a goldfish like water?

    2. david 12 Silver badge

      Re: Earlier this week

      I've seen people gambling on the Kentucky Derby immediately before the race was run. Seems highly suspicious. I hope the Kentucky Racing Commision investigates.

      1. David 132 Silver badge

        Re: Earlier this week

        Seems like it would be way more sensible to place a bet after the race has been run.

      2. DS999 Silver badge

        Re: Earlier this week

        Unless they had announced "we will publish the ruling on date X" how would they have known the ruling was coming the next day? Typically appeals courts just announce whenever, you might know it is coming soon but "soon" could be tomorrow or a month from now.

        Anyway the "insider trading" part would be if the CEO or other insiders were responsible for spreading the rumor of a favorable ruling and after spreading the rumor sold stock. That's an open and shut case. The timing of doing it the day before the ruling was just an interesting sideline.

  4. Blackjack Silver badge

    How long do patents last? Isn't it a maximum of twenty years? It has already been thirteen years!

    This ia just ridiculous.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      If Apple were infringing when the patent was in effect they'd still be liable for the infringement over that period, even if it's expired by the time they get it pushed through courts.

      Otherwise we'd find people walking free from murder because "Your Honour, the Prosecution have no client to bring a case because they're dead. Dead people have no rights in court."

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

Other stories you might like