WELCOME

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who ruled in favor of

Sept. 7, 2017 by Catherine Pope

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, wrote that he found that Apple's VPN software infringes by allowing Apple to bypass "an inherent" limitation on its patents. Koh wrote that, although "there is no evidence that the underlying limitations in the patents are affected by the underlying infringements, the court must infer that these are inherent. Moreover, the existence of a 'unique' limitation on a patent is not itself admissible evidence of the infringment, and hence cannot be denied."

The court also noted that the trial court erred in refusing to consider other factors that the jury had relied on, including whether VirnetX had developed a legitimate defense that could justify the award of a $1 million class-action lawsuit.

Despite the court's ruling, Apple has continued to argue that the VirnetX patents are not "unfair," noting that its software infringes on patent infringement that is "unlikely to have been invented."

"Apple has argued that the patent protections are unfair, as they are being applied to a new and unique set of technologies and technologies that would not be available under existing patent laws," said Brian Krzanich, Apple's general counsel. "And when they argue that the VirnetX patents are invalid, they should be given a fair hearing. But that is exactly the wrong thing to do -- to treat any claim of patent infringement as a mere argument to prove how it was developed."

"This is not a case where the court has the authority to decide whether a patent application is fair or not," he said. "This is a case about patent law based on the law of the land, not on the law of Apple. The court should not be able to decide whether a patent is a fair or not under the law of the land."

Apple's lawyers were not immediately available for comment.

The plaintiffs, including some of the world's top smartphone makers, include Samsung, HTC, LG, Motorola, OnePlus, and Xiaomi.

For more on the case, check out:

--The Verge: VirnetX "is a big mistake, a big embarrassment, a big mess, and an embarrassment to the American patent system"

--The Verge: VirnetX "has nothing to offer to Apple"

--Apple says it will sue if VirnetX and other VPN "fraud, abuse, or deceptive conduct" against Apple

--Apple: "Apple's case is a failure"