Dear Valued Visitor,

We have noticed that you are using an ad blocker software.

Although advertisements on the web pages may degrade your experience, our business certainly depends on them and we can only keep providing you high-quality research based articles as long as we can display ads on our pages.

To view this article, you can disable your ad blocker and refresh this page or simply login.

We only allow registered users to use ad blockers. You can sign up for free by clicking here or you can login if you are already a member.

Apple Inc. (AAPL): Why VPN On-Demand is Still Always On…

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL), we reported earlier Friday, had reversed a previous decision to change its VPN On-Demand feature on FaceTime for iOS 6.1 and revert it back to the “always on” default setting, going against the court order of a Texas judge who ruled that Apple infringed on a patent held by VirnetX for the technology. After initially saying it wold follow the order to make the change to the setting, Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) has recently changed its mind and said it would not do so, even in the face of a $368 million damage award  handed down by the judge.

Well, late Friday afternoon Eastern time, we have learned at lest one reason why the big check is not in the mail, and why Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) changed its mind about obeying the order. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Apple  reported that it has not reported the judgment as a loss on its books and that it appears that the company is preparing to appeal the judge’s decision.  “(Apple) is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time,” the document reads.

Image: Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Apple goes on to contend that the case isn’t officially over, so the judge’s decision is not considered final until it reaches a licensing royalties settlement with VirnetX. Apple is claiming that VirnetX is still trying to reach a royalty agreement, which keeps the judgement pending.  This was part of a motion filed in late march, which said, “Because VirnetX’s request for an ongoing royalty remains to be decided, the judgment in this case is not yet final or appealable.”

Is it just us, or does it sound like Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) is planning to keep its Texas lawyers busy in the next few weeks? What are your thoughts about this case? Let us know in the comments section below.

DISCLOSURE: None

Loading Comments...