Slashdot Mirror


Virnetx Loses Court Battle To Cisco Over VPN Patent

schneidafunk writes "VirnetX, a patent-licensing firm with 14 employees, has seen its stock price fall after it lost a major patent trial in Texas on Thursday. A jury there ruled that Cisco did not infringe VirnetX's patents on virtual private networks (VPNs), and that the networking giant didn't have to pay $258 million in damages."

2 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Awwww.... by Zemran · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is one part of US law that I will always fail to understand. Their action caused harm and CISCO should be able to claim for those damages. I have counter sued twice in the UK when I had to go to court over things that should not have gone to court.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  2. Re:Awwww.... by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the US, a counter suit is a counter claim for the same issue. If your neighbor cut down a tree rooted in your yard that shaded or dropped leaves on his, and sued you for the cost of removal, then you can "counter-sue" for the loss of the tree. You can't counter sue for his fence being over the property line, or for legal costs for a matter not yet resolved. You can re-sue for legal costs later, but you'd need proof they did so recklessly or otherwise inappropriately. Otherwise, you just ask the judge for costs in the case and hope he awards them, he usually doesn't.