VirnetX Says Cisco Should Pay $258 Million Over Patents
Not sure if this was posted. A friend just sent me this so I thought I would pass it along. GLL's.
Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) should pay $258 million for infringing patents over secure private communications technology, a lawyer for VirnetX Holding Corp. (VHC) told a federal jury today.
Cisco began using a VirnetX invention to improve security in 2005 and has made more than $1 billion of revenue related to the technology, VirnetX lawyer Doug Cawley, of McKool Smith, said during opening arguments at a trial in Tyler, Texas.
The dispute is over virtual private networks, through which a website owner can securely interact with a customer or an employee can work at home and have protected access to a company’s electronic files. VirnetX won a $368.2 million verdict against Apple Inc. (AAPL) in November over the same technology before a different Tyler jury. Cisco denies infringing the four patents, contends they are invalid, and argues VirnetX isn’t entitled to any damages.
“VirnetX did not invent secure communication over the Internet,” said John Desmarais of Desmarais LLP in New York, representing Cisco. San Jose, California-based Cisco “uses industry standard parts” and doesn’t violate VirnetX’s patent rights, he said.
Two of the patents in the Cisco case also were asserted against Apple in the trial last year. VirnetX is asking the jury to award it a “reasonable royalty,” while Cisco argued in court documents that any damages should be limited or excluded altogether because Zephyr Cove, Nevada-based VirnetX took too long to file suit
The case targets Cisco routers, software and phones that have virtual-private-networking functions including its Unified Communications Manager product, Telepresence or AnyConnect. Cisco, whose products handle traffic over the Internet, reported sales of $12.1 billion in the quarter ended Jan. 26.
CW, my math is bad. So if the jury agrees along with the last two msft and aapl jury's that csco indeed abscounded with their intelectual property and we get treble damages, just how much is 3 X $258M plus royaly's????!!! BTW, did anybody see that QCOM raised their dividend rate?! It's coming.
Since yahoo did not seem fit to post my first responce, I'll try this again. Yes, Willie, that was a Bloomberg post. And I tried to post that I was again worried about the technicals, even thought I think we have enough time. But that is problematic. As you stated in another post the techs have turned again and MACD is a real problem. I have not traded this out of fear of a big move with the news we were expecting, but after this trial, I am going back to that mode. GL