VirnetX Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Apple – Again

Some would have their cake and eat it! This is just the case with VirnetX, which already won a $368.2 million ruling against Apple when a Texas court found the Cupertino company to be infringing its patents and is now going after Apple again with a new patent lawsuit.

FaceTime
FaceTime is a popular feature of both iOS and Mac OS X, but as the Tyler, Texas federal jury ruled, it violates four VirnetX patents — U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,418,504, 7,921,211 and 7,490,151 — which cover advancements for secure communication over the Internet.

So, after the Internet security company obtained a favourable ruling against Apple, it is now going after recently released products such as the iPhone 5, iPad mini, iPod Touch, and Mac computers, which weren’t included in the previous patent lawsuit, simply because of their release date.

As we previously reported, VirnetX has been busy lately filing patent infringement lawsuits, citing the aforementioned four patents successfully asserted against Microsoft, and now Apple. The company has recently filed lawsuits against Cisco, Avaya and other companies and has a pending patent infringement lawsuit against Apple at the US International Trade Commission.

[Via CNET]

Technology enthusiast, rocker, biker and writer of iPhoneinCanada.ca. Follow me on Twitter or contact me via email: istvan@iphoneincanada.ca

  • Acer12345

    Reap what you sow.

  • Wtf? Reap what you sow. It’s kind of funny how when an individual or company becomes very successful and all the little worms come out and want a piece. I wonder how much that Texas judge took. Under the table of coarse;). Remember, it’s “good old boy” politics there in Texas. Hehe.

  • Jonathan W.

    You could say, someone wanted…
    (•_•)
    ( •_•)>??-?
    (??_?)

    …a bite out of Apple.

  • Little Debbie

    They violated a patent. The same thing they go after others for. Fair is fair. Coarse is course in this instance.

  • Thats the problem with the judicial system, especially civil law. its all based on precedent so if they are successful against Apple it now makes it hard for the other companies they listed. I cant see this as being a mistake on so many companies parts, this must of been something they felt didn’t fall under the patient. Seriously why would like 10 companies risk huge law suits?