Here is his latest take on the situation. I tend to agree with everything he wrote. Thanks to floyd for all his diligence:
Re: Cisco Verdict // Additional comments
Something else to consider is whether the verdict of patents valid, no infringement is truly a disastrous outcome for VHC. I don't believe it is. Some verdicts that I would consider disastrous would have been:
Patents invalid, no infringement - This would have been disastrous all around.
Patents invalid, infringement - This happened to Leader Technologies against Facebook last year. Patent invalidation is bad.
Patents valid, infringement, small damages - I am also thrilled we did not see this. Even if the VHC patents were valid and infringement determined, but the jury awarded only say $10 million, this could have caused major problems for the royalty rate structure. This did not happen thankfully.
The Cisco "win" essentially means they have stolen a free license. It does not mean Avaya is off the hook, although I can see why they may decide to take their chance in court. It does not mean Apple is off the hook. And it does not change the fact that these patented inventions are built into R10 / 4G LTE-A specs.
I have always stated Cisco is a big-time past infringer (I still believe they are). But Cisco is not critical to the VHC revenue stream going forward because Cisco is what I consider a little fish in the 4G pond, which is where the real money lies. So, while I would preferred the jury coming to the proper conclusion, juries are unpredictable (which we have stated numerous times). It's just the reality of IP litigation. I still believe that VirnetX technology is fundamental to securing real-time communication over Next Gen Networks. We will just have to wait and see how things unfold from here.
Well, my posts are used to be the most hated with the highest "thumb-down" counts, as if that was for real!
Today, majority of my readers took my posts seriously, and sold the stock after hour. Good for you guys, finally grown up a little.
Watch for a gap down tomorrow.
Why? The company's stories are now broken - they are now some huge holes in that grand picture they painted two years ago. And paid pumpers like Mr Moreno, as I once said who had the nerve to pump this junkie with his real name - for some meager money - would be taken down mercilessly by the Wall Street, and his sponsors, will probably be sued in time by some angry bulls/investors who lost their shirts.
This trading game will get a lot more uglier in time.
floyd blows smoke and may be the set-up man for the shorts. He tries to run the price so the shorts can pile in. I'm sick of reading his stuff because he's now proven dead wrong as CSCO blew VHC completely out of the water. Maybe it's floyd who doesn't understand this technology that a bunch of lay people decided upon.
Cisco is on the hook for future licensing ... And its the same Judge for both cases, so the judge may award money even if the jury did not and more likely judge will fine cisco every day for 45 to go into a license agreement just like APPLE is doing right now / 330K a day x45 day = 14m. If the patents were invalid then that would be a huge win for cisco but that did not happen. So are they stealing the license YES, did they get a free cookie today YES will they keep getting the free cookie NO cisco will pay for that cookie / they are valid patents again :-D
I'm not certain it's worth responding to you, but I question your opinion that CSCO "blew" VHC anywhere. Patents were upheld now by three separate juries. The media has been goosing the shorts by presenting only half (or less) of the story. This stock is far from dead, and in fact I would guess that they are really only in the first inning. But you go ahead and keep spouting your #$%$.