Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
please provide evidence
Time will tell.
The company did an EXCELLENT job in the appeal to the Federal Circuit. Personally, I think VPLM has a good chance of getting an overturn of Koh's ruling on Alice
VPLM has presented a very STRONG case for reversing the Alice decision.
Time will tell
I'm sure that soon there will be a copy of the actual brief that can be posted
https://www.voip-pal.com/voip-pal-appl-amzn-opp-fed-appeal
Here's the response info.
I don't measure the value of the terrific appeal by our legal team by how the shares respond today. When we win the appeal, there will be huge spike in price and volume.
Not concerned
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/VPLM/news/Voip-Palcom-Files-an-Opposition-to-Apple-and-Amazons-Motion-to-Dismiss-The-Company-Also-Files-its-Appeal-with-the-US-Cou?id=232668
Voip-Pal.com Files an Opposition to Apple and Amazon’s Motion to Dismiss; The Company Also Files its Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
The Company Remains Determined to Enforce Its Intellectual Property Rights
BELLEVUE, Wash., June 26, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”, “Company”) (OTCQB: VPLM) announced two significant legal filings in support of its patent lawsuits.
On June 19, 2019, the Company filed its opposition to a consolidated motion to dismiss filed by Apple and Amazon in Case Nos. 18-CV-6216-LHK and 18-CV-7020-LHK, which are overseen by the Honorable Judge Lucy H. Koh (District Court, N.D. Cal.). These cases asserted patent infringement of the Company’s U.S. Patent Nos. 9,537,762, 9,813,330 9,826,002 and 9,948,549.
Separately, on June 25, 2019, the Company filed its Appeal brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, strongly challenging the District Court’s decision dated March 25, 2019, granting the Defendants’ motion to dismiss under 35 U.S.C. §101 in Case Nos. 18-CV-06217-LHK, 18-CV-06177-LHK, 18-CV-04523-LHK, and 18-CV-06054-LHK, which asserted the Company’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,542,815 and 9,179,005. Both filings can be viewed on the Company website www.voip-pal.com
Emil Malak, CEO of Voip-Pal, explained, “Like many smaller innovators, our Company’s patents have faced serial challenges from Big Tech firms, relying on new legal loopholes. In particular, a spate of challenges are being brought against under § 101 based on a 2014 case called Alice, which has undermined patent protection of computer-based inventions. Just three weeks ago, hearings conducted before the Senate Judiciary IP Subcommittee Hearings, led by Senator Thom Tillis, highlighted widespread frustration with how Alice has destroyed patent rights since 2014.”
Mr. Malak continued, “The case law based on Alice is strongly biased against computer-implemented and software inventions—which many Courts dismiss as ‘generic and abstract’ and thus patent-ineligible. Such interpretations make no sense in a day when everybody’s phone is a mini-computer that runs via innovative data software. We are optimistic the legislators and the courts will take appropriate action to properly protect software patents that improve computer functionality.”
“As an inventor myself, I can attest that all ideas begin as an abstract dream that evolves into a practical invention. Unfortunately, misinterpretation of the Alice 101 decision by many Courts along with confusion created by the guidance given by the U.S. Supreme Court has resulted in a further killing field of many valuable patents.”
“Over the nearly 15 years since I began with Digifonica, we have experienced many ups and downs. During that time I have declined offers that could have enriched me personally but would not have been beneficial for our shareholders. The shareholders, small and large are the reason we continue to fight, and the reason we will not stop until we receive fair and just monetization for all, based on the technical merits of our patents. Patience is a virtue.”
Recently, Mr. Malak was interviewed by CEOCFO Magazine, and also authored an op-ed published on IPWatchdog.com. Both the interview and op-ed discuss the current state of U.S. patent law and can be viewed at www.voip-pal.com.
About Voip-Pal.com Inc.
Voip-Pal.Com, Inc. (“Voip-Pal”) is a publicly traded corporation (OTCQB: VPLM) headquartered in Bellevue, Washington. The Company owns a portfolio of patents relating to Voice-over-Internet Protocol (“VoIP”) technology that it is currently looking to monetize.
Any forecast of future financial performance is a "forward looking statement" under securities laws. Such statements are included to allow potential investors the opportunity to understand management’s beliefs and opinions with respect to the future so that they may use such beliefs and opinions as one factor among many in evaluating an investment.
Corporate Website: www.voip-pal.com
IR inquiries: IR@voip-pal.com
IR Contact: Rich Inza (954) 495-4600
and what will you say when it is announced that is was filed on time?
A great article by IP Watchdog about the importance having better guidelines re: 101,102 and 103
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/04/18/reactions-roll-in-on-congresss-proposed-101-framework-the-right-approach-or-a-swing-and-a-miss/id=108407/
And this relates to my post, how?
Great story about someone who fights for all patent owners...
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/06/20/gene-quinn-named-top-ip-strategist-iam-third-consecutive-year/id=110537/?fbclid=IwAR3Xa8_GYwGkXwXzddcPz9KYrWoKuJSK9M7WyWJquPWXIU0bI7WsqOAWYak
Thank you, Gene for working on behalf of a fair US Patent system!
call him and ask him.
Your post is inaccurate
The time, sales and volume indicate the opposite.
People were buying the ask strongly today....a "few shares"????...LOOK AT THE TAPE
Please tell us more .....nyt
the printed low today is .019....your statement is FALSE
really? I had NO idea
It's FAR from a lost cause.
No one likes to see the process that we are being put through except for shorts and bashers.
But we will have our day....
VPLM - winning at the PTAB, European patents in hand, 101 appeal coming, Alice reform coming
no it isn't...just scare tactics
Good interview with the CEO of Voip Pal
VOIP-PAL CEO and Director Emil Malak discusses his Battles with the Large Communications Companies to Protect His Patented Technology that Enables Switching between the Internet and Landlines when Placing Phone Calls
Emil Malak, CEO & Director
VOIP-PAL (OTCQB: VPLM)
http://www.voip-pal.com/
Interview conducted by:
Bud Wayne, Editorial Executive, CEOCFO Magazine, Published June 3, 2019
CEOCFO: Mr. Malak, Would you give us a brief description of your technology that has revolutionized communication?
Mr. Malak: A team of Russian, Danish, New Zealand and Canadian software and hardware engineers came into my restaurant, the Bellaggio Café, in 2004. They said that internet would be the future for making telephone calls. They explained that internet telephony was going to become very popular. What has to happen is they will have to differentiate when a call is issued. If I called you today it would go to the hub of AT&T; if I am with AT&T the system will ask two questions. Are you Bud Wayne on the internet, and do you have an internet package? If you do, then will just send it; the first five seconds it connects to the internet and it is free. If you are not on the internet, it will go through the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) and they are going to charge you in terms of the minutes.
Most of the telecommunications entities use this system. We believe this means every single click has to apply this differentiating question: whether or not you are on the internet, if so, then it is mostly free, and if not, it will route through your legacy system via PSTN and charge the time per your minutes package. We believe every click and message done this way goes through public or private since 2010. What our patented technology does is allow phone calls routed over the Internet to be seamlessly transferred between traditional landlines, cell phone networks and the internet. Without our technology this would be practically impossible and costly today, and the big players have broken our patent and are using our technology without licensing it. Each one should be paying a fee to use our technology.
CEOCFO: Your company put up nodes and established the pathways, is that correct?
Mr. Malak: We installed nodes in Vancouver, London and Denmark to internally test if the system worked. We knew it worked when we started testing in 2006, and we filed for the patents, which took us until well into 2013 to get them issued. Now we are in 2019 and we are nowhere near monetizing our patents. IPR petition after IPR petition and lawsuit after lawsuit and we are still nowhere near monetizing our patents. The Silicon Valley infringers are using the broken and biased patent system to keep us in court for years to come.
CEOCFO: Your technology is being used all over the place by many different companies. Would you tell us some of the companies that are using it right now?
Mr. Malak: Every company that is currently in telecommunications, whether internet or legacy (PSTN), such as AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, Apple, and Facebook, and also companies like Amazon because of Alexa, and Google etc., have been and are still using our Voip-Pal system. We consider their subscribers to be our indirect subscribers.
CEOCFO: Did they take your technology and then integrate your technology and build their own from it?
Mr. Malak: Yes, they just integrated our technology into their own product, because that was the cheapest way of differentiating between a private node and public node, in how to route a call.
CEOCFO: What was the response when you approached the bigger companies?
Mr. Malak: They said “Go to hell, you will never win. We are big boys.” That is happening all the time and it is nothing new. Unfortunately the patent system supports the big infringers and makes it almost impossible for a small patent owner or inventor to monetize their now worthless issued patents.
CEOCFO: How long does it take to get a patent issued?
Mr. Malak: It can take six or more years to have a patent issued. Add another two to three years to get through any IPR challenges. Then you must survive another three to five years of court proceedings for the hope of being awarded damages. Then another few years to collect the damages. Very few small companies and inventors can even survive the process. So who wins? The deep pocketed Silicon Valley and big pharmaceutical companies etc. The inventor loses. If we want to encourage innovation, the process needs to be shortened. It should not take more than four years from start to finish to actually monetize a patent.
CEOCFO: How is the Alice 101 motion destroying innovation?
Mr. Malak: In 1876, Alexander Graham Bell was credited with inventing and patenting the first practical telephone. Around the same time Thomas Edison was rolling out literally hundreds of inventions and patents for things like the power generator, the light bulb, sound and motion picture recording apparatus. These great inventors must be turning in their graves now watching so many great inventions being invalidated because of a complete lack of understanding coming from the PTAB and the courts as a result of the AIA.
Today our lives are run by computers, so the courts have now decided that any computer data improvements are abstract. This is madness! As an inventor, let me point out that all ideas begin as an abstract dream that is then developed to the point it becomes an actual invention. For more than two hundred years of patent laws abstract was never meant to apply to patents. Now suddenly the courts are subjectively invalidating quality patents for being “abstract.”
CEOCFO: Did the America Invents Act passed in Congress in 2011, help or hurt you?
Mr. Malak: Michelle Lee, former USPTO Director and one time high ranking Google IP attorney made sure that the AIA would make it very difficult for patent owners to monetize their inventions. The AIA was called by many experts and honest judges a “killing field” for patents. The anti-patent policies of the Obama administration have created a very hostile environment for patent owners on all levels, including IPR/PTAB, federal district court, appellate courts and the confusing message from the Supreme Court on abstract in the now famous Alice Corp. vs. CLS Bank International. All of these have caused the cancellation very good patents by the thousands. It seems to me the financial contributions by the Silicon Valley to elected politicians were mostly responsible for the passage of the AIA.
CEOCFO: Do you want the USPTO to make these decisions?
Mr. Malak: First, the AIA must be repealed and replaced. It is a cancer that cannot be repaired. The USPTO has over 8000 of the world’s best technical experts who have the title of Examiners. They also have about 600 of the best attorneys that can analyze the legal interpretations of patents. We should use them. Patents should be examined at the USPTO on all technical levels such as 101 (Alice motion), 102, 103, prior art, obviousness, novelty and indefiniteness before the examiner issues the patent. Whenever a patent is challenged, decisions of validity should be made by PTAB judges at the USPTO based on clear cut guidelines. Nothing should ever be subjective. The federal courts should only be asked to make decisions on infringement and damages. They lack the complex technical expertise to make patent validity decisions. Also, the process is too long. The time it takes should be cut in half.
The Silicon Valley has exploited the weaknesses in current patent law and they are comfortably acting is if they are above the law. I do believe the new USPTO Director Andrei Iancu is doing his best to address each of these issues and bring back the credibility and integrity of the Agency. In my opinion he will only succeed if the AIA is repealed and replaced.
CEOCFO: Are you saying lobbying must stop?
Mr. Malak: I am saying lobbying with any financial contributions and donations to support elected officials and their reelection campaigns leads to corruption. The typical example is the corrupt America Invents Act. Let’s not think the public is naïve. Why would the Silicon Valley give millions of dollars to politicians? They do it to get back favors in return for their contributions. The United States still today is the best country for freedom of speech and justice. The world looks up to the Unites States and we need to constructively correct the mistake of the AIA that is more fitting of a banana republic.
A win is a win.......
And where, pray tell, did you hear this???
Well done, Emil!
good post DB
And just where did the Honorable Lucy H. Koh make this statement?
Plenty of companies infringe and don't license, even when sued
Asked before and answered.
Companies cannot license unless they can rely upon enforcement of their IP.
the PTAB/IPR/AIA threw a wrench into that.
PTAB 8-0 for us..
We move on
VPLM is in the business of protecting its IP, and it is VERY expensive to do this
with a post grant patent system that is designed to drain the resources of small companies fighting
infringement cases.
I thought you already knew that....
Why are you posting a vague allegation
Some think that patents should be done away with, and make some interesting arguments.
Until then, VPLM owns them and has every invention of ENFORCING THEM
8-0 at the PTAB "means" that Voip Pal has withstood ALL of the challenges to the validity of the patents that are judged by the PTAB. Regrettably, the PTAB should take up 101 in IPR, as the expertise is there, as is the direction coming from the head of the patent office.
The lack of clarity around 101 has made the entire process a minefield.
Patent owner goes through years of work with the patent office, prior art examinations etc..
After being granted patent, patent owner attempts to license technology to companies that are likely infringing.
Patent owner gets strung along, because the potential licensee knows the system is rigged AGASINST the patent owner, so the name of the game is stall, stall, stall..
Patent owner sues for infringement
Defendant(s) file for IPR, which deals getting into court for 18 months more
Plaintiff (VPLM) wins, and then gets into the courts
Defendant files 101 Challenge
You can't get to where we currently are without WINNING the PTAB. And still the system is stacked against the patent owner.
You think this is a fair system? You think VPLM is the "bad guy" for defending their IP rights?
I don't
If we don't want The United States to end up being run by a handful of corporate governments, fighting back on behalf of small inventors and patent holders, is part of the solution.
Citizens United has caused major problems for our government and elections.
I will not stop fighting for what this country is supposed to be - opportunity for everyone.
Silicon Valley got big on the ladder of intellectual property, and now they want to burn the ladder and keep the clouds for themselves...
It's up to us to fight back...Europe gets it - they are fighting the Anti-Trust battle...we are late....
That is correct. They cannot derive revenue from licensing the patents because the system favors infringers, and prevents patent holders from enforcing their patents in an efficient and fair manor.
We are witnessing the end result. A small company fighting tenaciously to defend its IP rights
Patent system is stacked against the small inventor.
AIA designed to protect Silicon Valley and big tech, and allow them to infringe without consequence
PTAB/IPR process stall the process of getting to court
101 rules are extremely subjective.
And yet, through all of it, here we are, still fighting and still winning.
Given ANY opportunity to appeal, they will.
Where's your proof?