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.
Right on Stef. These big “honest” (cough, cough) companies are the gold standard in moral & ethical behavior…maybe that’s why they keep losing lawsuits and forced to pay settlements and jury awards to the little guys. #SMFH
Suggest you read the latest DealBook article explaining Apples latest settlement for continuing to block/rip off the little guys.
The tides are starting to turn. Apple just settled another lawsuit for antitrust claims against App Store by small app developers. Why is the Apple Goliath always trying to steal from the little guys?
As reported by Andrew Ross Sorkin
NY Times DealBook: Apple settles rather than fights
Apple’s App Store accommodation
When Apple settled a lawsuit yesterday brought by a group of small app developers, it represented a shift in the balance of power in an app ecosystem that the tech giant has long tightly controlled. Just how much of a shift is up for debate.
What did Apple agree to?
> Developers will now be allowed to tell customers, via email and other channels (but still not inside apps), about alternative payment methods that avoid Apple’s commissions. Apple framed this as a major concession, although it selectively enforced the rule before.
> It agreed not to raise the 15 percent commission that Apple collects from small app developers on customer purchases for at least three years.
> It will set up a $100 million fund for payouts to developers who made less than $1 million a year from Apple’s app store in the past few years. They will be eligible for payouts between $250 and $30,000 each.
> It will publish an annual report on the number of apps it rejects or removes from its App Store, as well as data on its search results.
Does this change anything?
Perhaps little for developers, but for Apple it might be a lot. Developers had already been pushing their customers to circumvent Apple’s commissions, and the settlement officially blesses that arrangement. Seen through the lens of Apple’s other legal troubles, the settlement could be strategically shrewd, easing the threat of more government action, and shifting Washington’s focus to other tech giants who have been less willing to make similar concessions.
Apple still faces a broader lawsuit about its App Store from Epic Games (the maker of Fortnite), with both companies awaiting a decision from a federal judge. The Supreme Court has also allowed other antitrust class actions against Apple to move forward. Notably, yesterday’s settlement is subject to approval by the same judge who is presiding over the Epic Games and consumer suits against Apple.
The temporary restraining order (TRO) has nothing to do with VPLM filing SCOTUS writ to join American Axle. Those are 2 separate issues.
The SCOTUS filing is in support of American Axle (AA). If AA is successful at SCOTUS, their success can open the door for VPLM to request previous negative 101 decisions in N CA by Koh on RBR patents to be vacated.
The TRO was filed in Waco relating to be new Mobile Gateway cases against Apple et al to prevent them from trying to play venue games to get these cases moved to N CA. Hopefully we will see a positive ruling from Judge Albright in the TRO motion very, very soon.
I’m not sure that a DJ decision is as easy or even possible to appeal as a final case decision. Apple didn’t lose any “rights” by this decision and the decision to not relate to previous cases didn’t settle the cases. The cases are still moving with the judges they were assigned to.
If there’s a lawyer who can shed more light appealing a DJ decision, I’d appreciate your insight.
IMO, it wouldn’t make sense to take a chance on those patents right now unless & until American Axle is victorious & Hudnell can get the previous Koh rulings in the RBR family vacated. If that happens, then it’s Katy bar the door in Waco because new infringement complaints should immediately be filed in W TX for the RBR patents.
It’s a thing of beauty to see Waco just posted a notice in the Mobile Gateway dockets that reads:
NOTICE OF DECISION
Plaintiff VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. (“VoIP-Pal”) notifies the Court that on August 25, 2021, Judge Lucy H. Koh of the Northern District of California entered an order denying Apple’s motion to relate Apple. Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc., 5:21-cv-5110-EMC (N.D. Cal.) (“Apple II”), involving U.S. Patent Nos. 8,630,234 and 10,880,721—the same patents as this case—, to Apple. Inc. v. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc., 5:20-cv-2460-LHK (N.D. Cal.) (“Apple I”), involving U.S. Patent No. 10,218,606. As such, Apple II remains assigned to Judge Edward M. Chen and will not be reassigned to Judge Koh. A copy of the order is attached as Exhibit A.
Dated: August 26, 2021
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/Lewis E. Hudnell, III Lewis E. Hudnell, III lewis@hudnelllaw.com
Nicolas S. Gikkas nick@gikkaslaw.com
Hudnell Law Group P.C.
800 W. El Camino Real Suite 180 Mountain View, California 94040 T: 650.564.3698
F: 347.772.3034
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF VOIP-PAL.COM, INC.
To be clear, the 606 declaratory judgement case is still alive in N CA but now meaningless for the Mobile Gateway cases in Waco. Who cares about the RBR DJ cases in N CA. There’s a strong possibility those faulty 101 decisions can be vacated IF the Supreme Court rules in favor of American Axle.
Even when the dust settles on the VPLM lawsuits, regardless who wins, there will be some who won’t accept the outcome & make up fake news about why the cases went the way they did. IHWT!
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
— Martin Luther King Jr. —
Not only rabbit holes…how about when he had to “…go chasing white rabbits, and you knew you’re going to fall, tell ‘em a hookah smoking caterpillar, has given you the call…Call Emil.”
Wait DB…didn’t Emil invent the Disco Ball for Saturday Night Fever?
VPLM will not disappoint. IHWT!
New SEC regulations going into affect for OTC securities…sure glad VPLM is a fully audited OTCQB stock.
Message from TD Ameritrade:
On September 28, 2021, new amendments adopted by the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) go into effect to enhance investor protection and improve issuer transparency. These amendments restrict the ability of market makers to publish quotations for those companies that have not made required current financial and company information available to regulators and investors.
Ahead of the regulatory enforcement date, we will only accept orders to liquidate positions (i.e. no new buy orders) starting August 13, 2021. After the amendment officially goes into effect on September 28, 2021, it may be more difficult to liquidate these securities. Quoting and market liquidity may also be very limited.
In Hudnell we trust! Great work!
Really? I don’t recall a single “pro vplm” person posting anything about thinking N CA was the savior for VPLM. Most of us posted the exa t opposite because history & resumes show the N CA judge is in the pocket of Big Tech!
“You can make money or you can make excuses. Your choice.”
- John Addison
I know what side I’m on when it comes to VPLM…but I didn’t get in at $ 0.14 a share!
P2 - Haven’t had a chance to download the filing yet. On my to do list today. From the sounds of it, this reply was just like every other one from Apple et al…total BS kissing up to Koh hoping to schmooze the courts.
P2 - Here’s a link to the SEC.gov with the VPLM filings as required by law. Read through the 10-Q (quarterly) & 10-K (annual) reports & you’ll get your answer on legal fees. If they paid any legal fees or retainers, the charge will be disclosed in the filings. Also pay close attention to the corresponding notes as they provide much more detail to the listed expenses.
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1410738&owner=exclude
Recycled?
Right. I can’t even withdraw more than $10,000 of my own money from the bank I’ve had accounts at for over 30 years without filing a bunch of papers then waiting to get MY money…all do to the 9/11 attacks. Imagine how long it takes for a $600,000 payment from a middle Eastern country to clear the banking system.
Besides, for those concerned…why would it be in the Dr’s best interest to lie about the contracts or expected payment? That would constitute fraud and he could be sued. The negative narrative makes zero sense.
Exactly right SD. Thanks for your thoughtful & informative posts.
P2 - Yes there is a lot going on but I don’t suspect dilution will be an issue. Might there be some at some point? Possibly but don’t forget Emil cancelled his anti-dilution clause and returned some stock, which already reduced share outstanding.
Share Structure:
Reporting date: 8/3/2021
Authorized: 3,000,000,000
Outstanding: 1,652,747,863
Restricted: 789,524,572
Unrestricted: 863,223,291
Source: https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/VPLM/security
All good questions, Only time & patience will tell how this goes in Waco.
Rapz - one update. Facebook motioned for and was granted an extension to reply last night. Their reply is now due on 9/7.
IKR DB….VPLM is more than funn!
Thanks for the kind words Prophet. The current SCPTUS term is over and I believe the next begins on the first Monday in October so not sure on your September comment. Regarding Waco, if you’re referring to the new Mobile Gateway cases, I don’t see a scheduling order in the docket but the extension granted gives defendants until 8/9 to respond to the TRO/injunction so not sure if there is still a hearing on 8/13. Maybe DB or Rapz knows more.
SCOTUS 2021-2022 teen reference:
https://ballotpedia.org/Supreme_Court_cases,_October_term_2021-2022
His post clearly said “…might review…” so not sure where any insinuation of “did” came from.
Who inferred from these words that SCOTUS decided to take the case or even made a decision?
Understood. Where was it posted SCOTUS agreed to hear the case? I must have missed that post from Rapz and can’t find it when I go back and check.
Please enlighten me.
Here’s the link to the case Rapz previously posted.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-891.html
His point is shown in details for the May 3,2021 entry. Quote…”The Acting Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.”
Rapz…no ruling on new Declaratory Judgement case regarding Mobile Gateway (234 & 721 patents) but definitely a new case filed by ATT & others in N CA trying to get Koh to do their bidding. Case 3:21-cv-05078 was filed on 7/1/21 in N CA…6 days after VPLM filed new Mobile Gateway cases in Waco.
Some just don’t understand Apple or any other Big Tech company…why buy or pay for licensing when the courts have showed them it’s way more profitable in the long term to steal the little guys IP. As long as it takes the “system” to handle the cases, the Bigs have already made major bank with the stolen IP…even better, it’s a cash cow if they never get caught! This isn’t difficult to understand!
Weird…I’m confused about the motor home thing…maybe I just read it wrong but sounds like someone wants to make some quick cash in Seattle servicing VPLM clients in the motor home. Heard there was a big gay community out there….gays have lots of money & invest in VPLM too. Not that there’s any wrong with being gay…
Another excellent post Rapz. Thanks for the insight.
Right on Rapz. Thanks for the clarification.
Exactly! Rather than face a real judge, the Bigs continue to stall & kick the can down the road hoping to bankrupt little Ole VPLM. Hasn’t worked yet…won’t work this time either.
IKR, unreal. Crooked Koh can’t help them in Waco.
If Apple’s delay tactic is granted, their response would be due around 8/10.
More delays by Apple in Waco. Filing for an extension to reply to the VPLM motion for injunction. Why would a multi-billion company with almost unlimited legal & financial resources need to delay a response to little old pesky VPLM? Just more stalling by Apple. Must need more time to put some kind of spin on the testimony from their “expert” witness at PTAB trails who admitted they’re using VPLM technology. Why can’t the Bigs squash little Ole VPLM? Hmmm…
HD1 - yes there are 2 cases showing against Apple in Waco however 1 has no documents filed to the docket. I could be wrong but I’m guessing it might be an error in the filing since everything is done electronically now. I’m keeping an eye on that case see if anything shows up.
6 new cases filed in Waco last night by VPLM. All the filings are for infringement of their Mobile Gateway patents (8,630,234 & 10,880,721).
Here are all the cases for reference:
6:21-cv-00665 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc. et al
6:21-cv-00667 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Google, Inc.
6:21-cv-00668 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc.
6:21-cv-00669 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
6:21-cv-00671 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. AT&T Inc. et al
6:21-cv-00672 Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Verizon Communications
Agree. The days start promising for the bump to the next consolidation level but gets kicked by sellers later in the day. Let’s get this candle lit for good!