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 " …

[TRT]

Why has no-one patented patent-trolling yet?

[John Robson]

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

[b0llchit]

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

[Michael Hoffmann]

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)

[Long John Silver]

A plague on both their houses

I suppose this enriches deserving lawyers.

[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.

or

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

or

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.

[DS999]

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.

[Paul Herber]

Re: Earlier this week

Do people do things like that?

[J. Cook]

Re: Earlier this week

Does a goldfish like water?

[david 12]

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.

[David 132]

Re: Earlier this week

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

[DS999]

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.

[Blackjack]

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

This ia just ridiculous.

[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."