Actually, the inventors of those patents DO work for the company...as they did for SAIC. And they did/do have other licensees. Avaya, Siemens and one or two others. we’ll see how far Cisco gets trying to bid for FirstNet and other programs without those licenses. If those patents are worth nothing, why is Apple continuing the fight? Why did Apple profess to have an easy to implement workaround at trial, only to have it completely disrupt Facetime and iMessage when they attempted to implement it? But if you’re a die-hard Apple fan, go with it. Stay tuned.
SueRae. . . They HAD no licensees until they got Microsoft to capitulate in 2011. I repeat. . . Why did SAIC release this "oh so valuable patent," and allow the employees to go, if it was so important as you claim? If it was developed for the US government as you claim, the Government would hold title. That the way Government contracts work. . . and if there is a clause that allowed SAIC to retain ownership, again why assign it elsewhere. . . Especially if it has a potential value in the "billions" of dollars. It simply doesn't make sense. I've slogged through these patents trying to find something unique that justifies this. I can't find it except what I've described. . . which comports with the contemporaneous testimony and facts. These are extremely obvious developments to anyone in the industry. . . and by definition, should not have been patentable. . . Except for their specific approach. Cisco and Apple use a different approach to accomplish a similar thing. No infringement of VirnetX's approach.