Skip to main content

Court fines Apple a whopping $625 million over FaceTime and VPN patent infringement

There are few corporate entities less scrupulous than so-called patent trolls. They’re companies that don’t manufacture or sell the intellectual property they own, but nonetheless happily extract licensing fees and settlements from companies they identify as guilty of infringing on said property. In this morally dubious category of firms, Nevada-based VirnetX is unquestionably one of the most prolific: It won a $200 million verdict against Microsoft in 2010, and turned its attention to Apple that same year. Now the decision against Apple is out, and the news isn’t at all good for the iPhone maker.

“Cases like this simply reinforce the desperate need for patent reform.”

Recommended Videos

Jurors in an East Texas federal court awarded VirnetX a massive $625 million over patents related to Apple’s virtual private network (VPN) and FaceTime features. The penalties amounted to almost a $100 million more than VirnetX was seeking.

The fine actually represents a consolidation of two separate settlements. A jury in 2012 ordered Apple to pay $355 million after ruling that the company violated several of VirnetX’s secure VPN network patents, but the decision was overturned on appeal. This week, the court reinstated the original fine and assessed additional damages of $290 million over intellectual property violations in FaceTime.

At issue are several patents, at least one of which which dates back to 1998. They describe “secure communications” over the Internet, vague technology that VirnetX argues Apple improperly imitated in its implementation of VPN, FaceTime, and iMessage encryption. “The jury saw what we have been saying all along: Apple has been infringing on VirnetX’s patented technology for years,” the legal firm that represents VirnetX said in a statement.

Apple, unsurprisingly, disagreed. “We are surprised and disappointed by the outcome and we’re going to appeal,” said a company spokesperson, who added that all of the patents which VirnetX cited in its original case have since been invalidated by the United States Patent Office. “Our employees independently designed this technology over many years,” the company said. “Cases like this simply reinforce the desperate need for patent reform.”

The Cupertino company may have a point. According to research firm United Patents, holding companies like VirnetX filed 66.9 percent of patent lawsuits in the United States in 2015 alone, and the Eastern District of Texas handled a disproportionate number of those cases — 44 percent (and over 400 alone last November). Why the preference for Texas? Consumer advocacy group the Electronic Frontier Foundation maintains that the Eastern District erects arbitrary judicial barriers to defendants in patent trials. While companies as large and profitable as Apple can afford a legal team capable of combating such out-of-state cases, smaller firms often opt to settle with patent abusers.

There’s hope on the horizon — a petition currently before the Federal Circuit aims to reduce the number of cases in the Eastern District’s jurisdiction — but until bogus patent enforcement becomes significantly more challenging or expensive, patent holding firms will no doubt continue to litigate. VirnetX, for one, is actively pursuing cases against Cisco, Siemens, Avaya, and others.

Kyle Wiggers
Kyle Wiggers is a writer, Web designer, and podcaster with an acute interest in all things tech. When not reviewing gadgets…
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: the upgrade we’ve been waiting for?
Thre Flip 7 models next to each other

I never really thought that I'd want to go down the route of owning a flip phone, ever since I swore off my Nokia in the early 2000s (you know, the one with the weird felt covering and tiny notification window).

Fast forward two decades, and I'm considering rejoining the race, thanks to the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7. Coming in at $1,100, it's not cheap, but it's definitely something different compared to the world of black rectangles, and it it feels like Samsung’s Flip family has finally come of age.

Read more
I used the Galaxy Z Fold 7, here’s why I’m completely smitten
The back of the Galaxy Z Fold 7

We’ve waited several years for Samsung to join the party, but it’s finally here: Samsung has followed rivals like Oppo, OnePlus, and Honor in building a thinner, lighter, and sleeker Galaxy Z Fold 7. It’s an impressive feat of engineering and a major upgrade over previous years.

It’s easy to consider the Fold 7 nothing more than an update to the Galaxy Z Fold 6, but in many ways, it feels like a huge step forward, not just for Samsung but for all folding phones. I spent a few hours with the Galaxy Z Fold 7 in an exclusive preview, and here’s why I absolutely love what Samsung has done this year.

Read more
I tried the Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 series – they’re sleek, but with a lot to prove
Watch 8 on a wrist

Trying out the Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 and Watch 8 Classic is a tough gig - not in terms of it being a hardship to try out two high-end models, but that it's impossible to assess them with only 30 minutes’ use.

I can easily talk about the improved design and the fit of the straps etc, but the real changes are within the health ecosystem, and they'll need sustained testing to really understand if they're any good.

Read more