Printed from http://www.electronista.com

VirnetX loses patent infringement case against Cisco

updated 10:49 am EDT, Fri March 15, 2013

Demand for $258 million in damages rejected by jury

Cisco has won in a patent infringement trial against patent-licensing firm VirnetX. A jury in a Texas court found in favor of Cisco Systems, confirming that it did not infringe on VirnetX Holding Corp's patents relating to secure network communications, and rejecting a demand from VirnetX for $258 million in damages.

The patents involved concern an implementation of virtual private networks (VPN), namely those used in Cisco's Unified Communications Manager, Telepresence, or AnyConnect in its routers, phones, and software, reports Bloomberg. The patents themselves are being reviewed by the US Patent and Trademark Office, though this was not disclosed to jurors during the trial.

General counsel for Cisco Mark Chandler thanked the jury for agreeing "with Cisco that our accused products do not use VirnetX's technology," and that Cisco would "continue to do the right thing for our customers and shareholders by vigorously defending against patent infringement lawsuits that lack merit." Hours before the verdict, Chandler testified before the House Judiciary Committee on patent litigation, and revealed that Cisco spends $50 million per year fighting 50 lawsuits against patent owners, many of which do not make products that use the patents.

While this is a setback to VirnetX, it has managed to win other cases under the same or similar patents. It claimed $200 million from Microsoft in 2010, while last month, a ruling that Apple had to pay $368 million to VirnetX was upheld and expanded, forcing Apple to pay $330,211 per day until the two companies settle on royalties and other factors.



By Electronista Staff
Post tools:

TAGS :

toggle

Comments

  1. Eldernorm

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 09-26-07

    More patent troll battles

    Its sad to see these companies that only sue for patents that they bought or suddenly fine useful for lawsuits.

    Now, I have nothing against a company getting fair value for its work, but many of these older patents were written so large that even if the description did not match their product, it could be used in the "rocket docket" of East Texas where the town of Marshall depends on the money these suits brings in to survive.

    It is just so sad.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Sound Blaster Roar Bluetooth speaker

There could very well be a new king of the hill for Bluetooth speakers, with Sound Blaster's recent entry into the marketplace. Bringi ...

Kenu Airframe Plus

Simple, stylish and effective, the Kenu Airframe + portable car mount is the latest addition to Kenu's lineup. Released earlier this y ...

Plantronics Rig Surround 7.1 headset

Trying to capture the true soundscape of video games can be a daunting task. Looking to surround-sound home theater options, users hav ...

Sponsor

toggle

Most Commented

 
toggle

Popular News