Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View sonicthoughts' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Vringo Sends Strong Message To SCOTUS And Google With Writ Of Certiorari And Why Shares Could Pop [View article]
    This is a big game. I think it boils down to this: SCOTUS is trying to balance the over-zealous United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas who has overstepped by siding with patent litigants with the arrogant and possibly corrupt Appellate court that overrules them.

    SCOTUS, rather than setting new legal precedents and upsetting the patent apple cart, is playing parent here and has spanked the Appellate court (with overturning their ruling) a LOT lately. Let's hope they continue this trend.

    Anyone who thinks this is really about "justice" and what is "fair" is misguided, but my bet is that that this trend continues.
    Jun 2, 2015. 11:43 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Android Taxonomies [View article]
    Glad you took a stab at customer segmentation but it seems purely subjective. I definitely agree that those customer types exist it seems like a random list. Also trying to understand the "so what" of your article. what is your point. Please take this as constructive criticism. I'm very passionate about Android and glad you wrote about taxonomies.
    Mar 17, 2015. 08:25 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Update: Vringo Post En Banc [View article]
    In light of the Teva / Sandos decision - how likely do you think it is that the Supreme Court will rule favorably for $VRNG? What timing would you expect?
    Jan 26, 2015. 01:10 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Hemispherx Biopharma's Ebola Lawyer: A Detailed Breakdown [View article]
    First, you have to make a distinction between a "Treatment" and "vaccine". The latter is 1000000x as valuable. Note $HEB is going after BOTH. The recent success with USAMRIID shows absolutely wonderful potential and the lab success is completely independent of lawyers or lobbyists.
    Nov 3, 2014. 10:14 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo: After The Federal Circuit Decision [View article]
    Odd that there is nothing on Belkin yet - no? Expect something today.
    Oct 2, 2014. 01:03 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Patents At High Risk Of Being Invalidated [View article]
    Your article claims "High Risk". Based on the recent IPR dismissal (with claims 1-9 and 13-18) for '1679, are you still arguing that they have high risk of this scenario??? Sure, anything can happen. How are you characterizing "High Risk"? If it is not then please retract or modify your article to reflect the current situation as it is entirely misleading.
    Sep 19, 2014. 09:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Patents At High Risk Of Being Invalidated [View article]
    So effectively you are saying that the PTAB is going to overturn a Federal Appellate court decision that has reviewed all the invalidity claims and denied them. Yes, that COULD happen, but extremely unlikely and completely misrepresented here. Citing Baxter is just one reference. What about: SAP America, Inc. v. Versata Data Development Group?
    SAP then tried to rely on the PTAB’s decision to vacate the jury verdict. The District Court refused, reasoning, inter alia, that “[t]o hold that later proceedings before the PTAB can render nugatory that entire process, and the time and effort of all of the judges and jurors who have evaluated the evidence and arguments would do a great disservice to the Seventh Amendment and the entire procedure put in place under Article III of the Constitution.

    The Federal Circuit sided with Versata and determined that SAP’s effort to overturn the jury verdict was “without merit.”

    Sure this is possible, but you fail to establish any basis for likelihood. Its slim that IPR will have any merit here.

    I have to agree with many who are suspicious about your identity. Can you please tell us why you chose to be anonymous ? Can you tell us what lawyer was consulted? Did they mention the Versata case?
    Sep 19, 2014. 09:26 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Is Worth Well Under $1 Per Share [View article]
    Beyond the risky court bets $VHC has one thing - patents. how come there is no discussion of the value of the entire portfolio. There is definitely a market and they have some very strong 4G patents - that alone should provide value.
    Sep 18, 2014. 12:03 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Is Worth Well Under $1 Per Share [View article]
    Taking a step back in terms of value of VPN + Facetime to apple:
    Facetime was used in almost all ads when iphone / ipad launched. It was their premier feature. VPN on demand is an absolute requirement in corporate markets which represents Apples highest iphone domestic growth area.
    Sep 18, 2014. 12:01 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Is Worth Well Under $1 Per Share [View article]
    There are very few facts in this article, those that exist are cherry picked but most of it is pure speculation.
    Sep 18, 2014. 11:58 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Is Worth Well Under $1 Per Share [View article]
    but they still ruled infringement.
    Sep 18, 2014. 11:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Is Worth Well Under $1 Per Share [View article]
    I think you already agreed that Apple infringed. The court said so. how can you post this:
    Author’s reply » You are in complete denial. VHC's patents are worthless, not infringed, and simple to work around. If VHC even bothers to retry infringement by FaceTime (and I think it's no better than 50/50 that they retry it), Apple will quickly show that FaceTime does not meet the anonymous limitation that is now part of the definition of secure communications link. I think you're in denial.
    They do not need to retry infringement.
    Sep 18, 2014. 11:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
    @Cassandra Veritas anyth thoughts on $VHC CACF timing?
    Sep 15, 2014. 12:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo: Next Steps After A Disappointing Decision Versus Google [View article]
    If you look at Judge Chen's background he is one of the most technically savvy IP specialists on the CAFC bench. He is probably the only one that sees what is going on. I'm sure he argued strongly that this was not Obvious but failed to convince the other judges. I'm sure he will want an en banc - not sure how strong he will advocate though ....
    Aug 16, 2014. 10:59 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The VirnetX Tinderbox [View article]
    The key to this is "[Apple] failed to advance a credible alternative". They had the choice but refused to cooperate, leaving $VHC expert with no opportunity but to use the method he chose.

    Taking a step back for a moment, when Facetime launched it was the core differentiator used in marketing programs. Facetime was a very important component and although Radar pushed on how it ended up as so significant, the three methods corroborate, as does common sense.

    I'm stunned that you actually state at the summary:
    Careful analysis of damages jurisprudence, and the citation by the CAFC of the Apple/Motorola case, indicates that the jury award and enhanced damages are in danger of being overturned;.

    The Citation indicates a danger - how can you possibly propose such a backward theory. It is certainly not supported by "Careful analysis" and how you get to "overturned" is just crazy.

    Again, classic hit piece.
    Jul 10, 2014. 10:40 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment