Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Sep 2013 22:49 UTC, submitted by Radio
Apple I missed this one:

The 2012 patent trial that grabbed the most headlines was Apple's $1 billion win (since reduced) against Samsung. But Apple also suffered a major patent setback of its own last year when a patent-holding company called VirnetX won a $368 million verdict against the tech giant.

The consequences of Apple's loss are now starting to become clear. This month, testimony in a court hearing showed that not only is Apple facing royalty payments that could cost it many millions more, but it has already made changes to one of its premiere products, FaceTime - changes that reportedly have degraded the service's quality.

While I won't shed a tear for Apple losing a patent lawsuit, this does illustrate once more why the system is broken.

Thread beginning with comment 573187
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh well
by wocowboy on Wed 25th Sep 2013 08:29 UTC
wocowboy
Member since:
2006-06-01

Facetime is used by a lot of people. The rest don't remember it exists because it wasn't made available like they said it would be because of the patent lawsuit and its aftereffects. Protecting patents you own is fine and legitimate if you produce a product related to that patent. If the sole purpose of the company owning a patent is to sue companies that actually produce products, then the patents they own should be invalid. It's quite simple but will never happen. Either produce a product or give up the right to sue.

Reply Score: 4