[asterisk-biz] Vonage Vs. Verizon Update

[sip]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:45:50 -0500, Eric \"ManxPower\" Wieling wrote
> Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> > 	That's not a change in the status of the case. Vonage lost in that
> > District Court, supposedly setting them up for an appeal in the court
> > where actual patent and IP expertise is available. Verizon is just
> > hitting Vonage with an injunction to enforce the patents found infringed
> > in this first case, which Vonage will just 
> > 
> > 	It's a typically lawyer/telco load of BS, but it's standard operating
> > procedure and the (Vonage) plan. If the district judge who granted the
> > "permanent" injunction doesn't let Vonage out of it when they ask for
> > it, then Vonage will ask the new appeals judge to lift that injunction.
> > If neither judge lifts the injunction, then Vonage actually is screwed,
> > because that also means those judges don't think the appeal is likely to
> > be heard or to succeed. And if they actually stop Vonage infringing,
> > therefore operating, before the appeal is successful, then they likely
> > will have killed Vonage. And then each less funded competitor, like
> > those (also) running Asterisk, will be in Verizon's sights.
> 
> Wouldn't most other telcos SBC and the "New Old AT&T" also be 
> infringing on the call forwarding patents?  Wouldn't companies like 
> Cox cable 
> (which provide phone service via VoIP) also be infringing?  All 
> these companies have very deep pockets. 

US Patent Law is mostly based on precedent, however. The more litigations you
win, the easier it is to win future ones. This is why, in many
patent-infringement cases, the patent holders first go after small companies
who are likely to settle. A settlement sets precedent and makes future cases
easier to win. After a few cases have been won, it's almost impossible to
fight no matter how deep your pockets may be. 

N.