AT&T Sues Vonage for Patent Infringement
304555
AT&T filed a lawsuit against VoIP provider Vonage Holdings, seeking damages for alleged patent infringement.
2658
In a blow to its fortunes that analysts feared could be fatal to the company, VoIP service provider Vonage was handed a defeat this afternoon by a federal jury in Kansas City, Kansas trying a patent infringement case brought against it by wireless carrier Sprint Nextel this afternoon.
419686
(InfoWorld) - Hackers who unlock Apple's iPhone from the AT&T network and share the method with 10 million of their closest Internet friends are inviting a lawsuit from the two companies, several intellectual property (IP)Â lawyers said Monday. Apple and AT&T may have a legal case against unlockers under the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), especially if they try to sell software code or devices that unlock the iPhone, the lawyers said. But the legal landscape gets a bit complicated -- there's a legal exception to the DMCA's anticircumvention provisions that allows individual mobile phone users to unlock their devices for use on other networks. So figuring out how to unlock the iPhone yourself is not likely to be a DMCA violation, most of the IP lawyers said. But posting instructions or code online, even for free, may earn you a cease-and-desist letter from an unfriendly lawyer, and selling software or a device that unlocks the phone is inviting trouble, most of the lawyers said. But there's plenty of disagreement among IP lawyers about the interpretation of the DMCA. "It's an extremely grey [area], because I don't think the exemption was altogether clear," said Bart Showalter, an intellectual property lawyer in Dallas with the Baker Botts LLP law firm. "The idea of trying to use copyright to, in a sense, establish exclusivity in a service contract ... is going to be an interesting thing to watch." John McLaughlin, founder of Uniquephones, based in Belfast, Northern Ireland, had planned to release software Saturday that wouldÂ allow users to unlock their iPhone. But early Saturday morning, McLaughlin said he received a phone call from a man saying he was from a law firm representing AT&T. The caller saidÂ McLaughlin could be sued for copyright infringement. Two other groups have claimed to have unlocked the iPhone. Representatives of both AT&T and Apple declined to comment Monday on possible legal actions against unlockers. Showalter suggested that unlocking the iPhone and posting code or instructions for free would likely fall under the exception to the DMCA's anticircumvention provisions, thus protecting the unlocker from legal action. The exception allows circumvention of device controls "for the sole purpose of lawfully connecting to a wireless telephone communication network," according to language from the U.S. registrar of copyrights. So if a hacker unlocks the iPhone, then posts the unlocking code for free, he's engaging in a legal activity and enabling others to engage in the same legal activity, said Michael Lewis, an IP lawyer with Fox Rothschild LLP. If that hacker is sued, he could probably argue that posting of the unlocking code is protected by free speech provisions in U.S. law, according to Lewis. Other IP lawyers disagreed. Movie studios have successfully sued Web site operators for distributing the DeCSS DVD-copying code, noted Carole Handler, an IP lawyer with Foley and Lardner LLP. The unlocker of the iPhone who posts code online could be held liable for secondary copyright infringement, she said. "I don't see that [Apple and AT&T] have a choice," Handler said. "They have to do something. If you don't protect your intellectual property, it's gone." Lewis' colleague, Gerry Norton, agreed, saying the unlocking exception was narrowly written. "The exception was just for the end-user," he said. Most of the lawyers agreed that selling software to unlock the iPhone, as McLaughlin was planning to do, would invite a lawsuit under the DMCA. "The courts seem to have less sympathy for people who are doing things to make a buck," Lewis said. But there wasn't even unanimous agreement on the legal liability of selling unlocking software. If the software being distributed targeted only the network lock on the iPhone, the developer could have a defense, Showalter said. "It does seem a little unusual to me that they say somebody can unlock their phone, but if someone tells them how to do it, that's a violation of the DMCA," he said. "If the software that's being sold is only doing the minimum amount that's necessary to allow it to interoperate with other services, you may have some support in the DMCA exception." Beyond the legal questions about unlocking the iPhone, Apple and AT&T could face their own legal challenges, Handler said. The exclusive contract between the two companies could lead to an antitrust lawsuit if a competitor or customer could successfully argue there's no other device like the iPhone available on the market, she said. "Consumers want new technology," she said. "This is the era of the consumer controlling the media. When the consumer is told he or she can't do something, they get pretty upset, and they start claiming conspiracy, antitrust, and the whole bit."
639312
Microsoft presented oral arguments Wednesday before the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-year-old patent lawsuit filed by AT&T whose outcome could require U.S. software companies to pay fines for patent-infringing software assembled in other countries.
354945
InfoWorld - Microsoft presented oral arguments Wednesday before the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-year-old patent lawsuit filed by AT&amp;T whose outcome could require U.S. software companies to pay fines for patent-infringing software assembled in other countries.
526380
Company "delighted" it wasn't more A US District Court jury said Vonage Holdings violated three patents held by Verizon Communications and ordered the VoIP telephony company to pay $58m in damages and annual royalties.â¦
754133
Â A VOIP (voice over IP) service offered by Vonage Holdings Inc. is not subject to the public utility regulations of individual U.S. states, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) declared Tuesday.
220648
Vonage Holdings Corp  said on Tuesday that it will appeal a U.S. jury verdict that it willfully infringed patents belonging to Sprint Nextel Corp  and that it pay $69.5 million in damages.
337962
Vonage downplays an appeals court decision affirming an earlier verdict of patent infringement on two patents owned by Verizon.
433474
(InfoWorld) - A federal court ruled on Tuesday that struggling VoIP provider Vonage infringed on patents owned by Sprint Nextel. Jurors in the U.S. District Court in Kansas found that Vonage willfully infringed on Sprint's patents as part of its VoIP service, Vonage said. The jury awarded Sprint $69.5 million in damages, which amounts to 5 percent of Vonage's revenue during the infringing period. Vonage plans to initially ask the court to set aside the verdict, but if that fails, the company will appeal the decision. In the meantime, Vonage will also develop workarounds that don't require Sprint's patents, it said. This is the second legal blow to Vonage this year. A court found earlier this year thatÂ Vonage infringed on Verizon patents. That case came with an injunction that would have prevented Vonage from signing up new customers.Â Vonage won a stay of that injunctionÂ and is appealing the original infringement ruling. Although it's clearly bad news for Vonage to have two patent infringement rulings against it this year, the appeals could change everything, said Seth Ostrow, a partner specializing in patents in Dreier LLP. "Often there are mistakes made during various stages of a case that form the basis for a successful appeal, and that, coupled with the statistics, gives reason to think that Vonage has a significant chance of getting this changed," he said. Statistics show that patent cases often get changed on appeal, he said. In August, Vonage said it had nearly completed rolling out workarounds for two of the three patents claimed by Verizon. Still, the Verizon case alone appears to have slowed growth for the company, the largest independent VoIP provider. In its second quarter this year, Vonage added 57,000 customer lines, compared with 256,000 in the same quarter in the previous year. Vonage has said that Verizon pursued the lawsuit in an effort to eliminate a competitor. Vonage stock opened the day at $1.99 and closed at $1.20, a 33 percent drop. This story was updated on September 25, 2007
728557
Wireless tech heads to court again, as Motorola subsidiaries Symbol and Wireless Valley claim patent infringement.
477353
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia  - A jury on Thursday ordered Internet phone provider Vonage Holdings Corp. to pay $58 million for infringing on three patents owned by Verizon Communications Inc..
11498
Promises to side-step its way out, again VoIP provider Vonage has lost another patent battle, this time with Sprint Nextel, which owns six infringed patents and stands to gain almost $70m in a court-ordered payout.â¦
520287
An appeals court on Wednesday upheld a verdict that Vonage Holdings Corp  infringed two patents held by Verizon Communications Inc .
738533
Vonage is downplaying an appeals court decision affirming an earlier verdict of patent infringement on two patents owned by Verizon Communications.
762710
Vonage has settled the patent-infringement suit AT&T filed against the smaller firm just two months ago.
435286
NEW YORK -   Verizon and Vonage on Wednesday will present opening statements in a patent-infringement case that could have a big impact on consumers and the nascent Internet telephone industry. Most immediately at risk is the future of Vonage.