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.
Don't you get it? It doesn't matter if somebody else files another IPR. The lawsuit that has been instituted, and stayed by mutual consent, is set to resume January 28th. Against Apple. Voip-pal WILL petition the court to resume, irrespective of any other matters brought by any other parties - because it was a CLEAN SWEEP of everything the single most powerful company in the world and their entire team of highly paid lawyers had to throw at them.
The case with Virnex that you quote was not like this. There was not a clean sweep of EIGHT - virtually everything Apple could think of - involved.
And in addition - the rejection of the claims by United Patents to be instituted as an IPR. So you have the top tech company - and the TOP conglomeration of tech company patent defenses... Slayed, by tiny little Voip-Pal.
Oh we'll see more volume - higher prices - and a settlement. On that you can depend. JMHO
Thanks Exotic for those notes. As I've followed this stock, and a few others for some time, I keep relevant notes like this, from myself, and others and review them from time to time on stellar trading days. Otherwise, the pertinent moving details of days like this get lost in the memory.
And inevitably - there are always voices who attempt to rewrite history - constantly. Thanks again.
Magic jack was not a winner for this group, and it's hardly the mainstream device that its inventors hoped that it would be. You can buy a lot of things at Walmart. It doesn't make them all earth shattering discoveries.
Besides - aren't there more exciting things to focus on than splitting hairs over semantics?
That's right. I happened to have been involved with the Cameron's at the time of the cancellation of the lawsuit in another business deal. What I CAN say is that there was no noticeable celebration of the cancellation of that suit in the Cameron camp. Far more to it than the papers could let on.
Everybody seems to love ripping on "Magic Jack" - personally, I love Magic Jack. I was there when it was rolled out by people involved with this group - and it served, in its time, to do something very important: When a technology is new, really at the "science fiction" stage - there are always early imaginings of how the technology will look upon implementation.
Do you remember the crazy films before space travel became a reality? They had the astronauts wearing their suits and ties, along with something resembling a diving bell on their heads...smoking, all the while - Quite hilarious if you get a chance to watch.
Magic Jack, and the social experiement that resulted in it NOT be widely adopted, paved the way for THESE SAME ENGINEERS at Voip-Pal to have the spark of invention that led to all of these patents. It's about imagination and being first to the table.
Say what you will about Emil - he has plenty of imagination, and has an innate eye for the spark of something new. So he's a hotelier...He's not the engineer here - he's the guy with the eye, who saw the spark of creation first, recognized it, and rolled the dice on it. Why is that so hard to understand?
If - IF - "we" are seriously peddling this to major news outlets, I must say, we could be doing a better job. I recognize the challenges - however, this company has managed to woo and convince some of the top legal minds to take this case on contingency - so without a doubt, the resources and value exist and are present in this situation.
It is my personal opinion that without a significant and focused effort - such as one given to find and secure proper legal representation - put into creating the buzz and legitimate news stories regarding this stock, and the recent events, this company has a far smaller chance of being taken seriously at any negotiation table.
So far, what I've seen, lo, these many years has been paid, cheesy, and obviously planted penny stock hype which has, occasionally, moved these shares in trading a few cents, here and there.
I believe this latest development has confirmed what many of us have believed for a long time, that there is real, tangible value here... and it's bloody time - IMHO - that this company takes a look at the marketing arm, tactics and finds new ways to step up their game, and start behaving like they belong in the leagues of the tech stocks that people respect and take notice of. It's time to start behaving like a company - in the public eye - not like a pink sheets pipe dream.
I love, and believe in VPLM - What I'm saying is - we brought the big guns to the game with our attorneys. Let's take the next step, and look at the public face of Voip-Pal.
Thinking outloud here, I'm surprised, as many of you are, that there hasn't been any outside news coverage (meaning, not simply a reprint of the company's own announcement) of the literally, precedent-making and unique victory against Apple with the 8 IPR clean sweep.
I'm thinking - probably - because, aside from this tiny group of interested parties who have educated themselves over the years on the ins and outs and finer points of the whole IPR issue at the PTAB - the general public would need a lot of 'splainin' to grasp the signficance of this win in a brief news article. Plus, the "not so ancient history" of this stock has been tainted by the shenangins of it's former CEO - So it's not a sexy news story. Fraught with blowback and liability, potentially...
Contrast that with the Oil States story, which is being covered by everybody -
Apple sure isn't chomping at the bit to get this story out there - So why aren't we peddling this story to more news outlets...Rich Inza? Hello? And helping legitimate news outlets grasp the significance of this ruling - and it's relationship to Oil States, and the other issues that THEY ARE covering? Sometimes you have to draw somebody a map...
Especially when you've been painted as a dark horse. This is an incredible development - inquiring minds need to know. :)
Just my 2 cents.
Not so - Before the news, VPLM was trading at .02 - it went up to .07 the day people started finding out. It's important on these types of analyses to get those facts straight going forward -
Precisely, and thank you for connecting those dots, especially for the newbies here -
What happened last week is beyond significant - it's earth shattering and precedent making.
Combined with the fact that Apple currently has only until December 20th to file for a review of the final decision, with the only court available to them, which - according to today's company announcement has a LESS STRINGENT standard of evidence than the PTAB regarding ruling on "unpatentability"... it seems that an appeal of this issue "should" be a moot point - and potentially - if they cannot bring something other than a frivolous claim - the basis for a court to rule treble damages for willful infringement. The only other remedy left to them is to settle, or take their chances in the matter that has been stayed, pending the outcome - knowing that the outcome was a CLEAN SWEEP for Voip-Pal.
As today's announcement reminded us, the clock is already, and has been ticking on the computable damages here since 2010.
Not even close. Unless you're allergic to money. We were at .36 not so long ago, with no more evidence in the validity of these patents than Emil telling us "we have the goodies" buy now, buy often. And hold. Jmho
Thanks, as usual GBC - thanks for being helpful and informative!
Well, a Good Morning to All - Anxiously looking at this mornin's opening - a whole lot more fun than this stock has been in a very long time! The possibilities just got a whole lot brighter. Apple isn't likely to roll over and die - we're not done yet - but to all the Naysayers who poo-poo'd this stock. Can I just say.... "na na na na na nah!" Happy Thanksgiving all.
Thank you GTC
Your mouth to Gods ears - We can only hope that logic and common sense will prevail...
Just Let This Sink In - The court transcript where the USPTO, under oath, admits that the former UPSTO Director, Michelle Lee, knowingly, and routinely manipulated the justice system in Patent Infringement cases in favor of the way SHE wanted to see them go - by the way SHE being waist deep in Silicon Valley bigs - and a MAJOR holder of stock in the very same companies that she vigorously defended from her post as USPTO Director.
USPTO: And, there’s really only one outlier decision, the SkyHawke decision, and there are over twenty decisions involving joinder where the –
Judge Taranto: And, anytime there has been a seeming other-outlier you’ve engaged the power to reconfigure the panel so as to get the result you want?
USPTO: Yes, your Honor.
Judge Taranto: And, you don’t see a problem with that?
USPTO: Your Honor, the Director is trying to ensure that her policy position is being enforced by the panels.
Judge Taranto: The Director is not given adjudicatory authority, right, under § 6 of the statute that gives it to the Board?
USPTO: Right. To clarify, the Director is a member of the Board. But, your Honor is correct –
Judge Taranto: But after the panel is chosen, I’m not sure I see the authority there to engage in case specific re-adjudication from the Director after the panel has been selected.
USPTO: That’s correct, once the panel has been set, it has the adjudicatory authority and the –
Judge Taranto: Until, in your view, it’s reset by adding a few members who will come out the other way?
USPTO: That’s correct, your Honor. We believe that’s what Alappat holds.
This is not a page 25 news item, folks. Innovation and inventors are the heart and soul of this Nation. This is more than an abuse of power - it strikes at the very heart of US Nationalism and our World Interests. With American Students ranking 30th in the world in Math and Sciences - this blow to American Interests could be the death knell of US as a super power. If our young, energetic minds cannot gather the will to invent and discover, knowing that the USPTO will simply hand their amazing discoveries and innovation over to big business - Why Would They Bother? We CANNOT simply stand by and shake our heads, allowing this to be "the way it is".
Pardon me. If we are going to start debating credentials, then, by all means - let's get it right:
Dr. Thomas Sawyer: Dr. Sawyer holds a B.Sc. (Engineering) from UCLA, a M.A. (Business and Urban Affairs) from Occidental College, a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from Florida State and a Ph.D. in Management from Walden University. He performed Graduate Research (Public Affairs) at Coro Foundation and has completed other graduate studies at the University of Utah, the University of Southern California and California Institute of Technology.
Maybe you're not a fan of his Florida State Clinical Psychology degree? Diploma mill, is it? Then what is UCLA? Occidental College? Cal Tech? HMM? Chump schools, I presume? Perhaps Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford and George Bush were all fake, made up presidents also??? I have no problem with a fair debate, but how exactly should one measure an argument when it begins with a litany of lies and deceptions?
It's easy to step forward 15 - 20 years and say, hey, why didn't they do this or that? The problem is, in the early stages when Digi was in the throes of developing these ideas and talking about VOIP - VOIP was anything BUT a sure thing. In fact, it seemed pretty out there - science-fictionesque, in reality.
Would there have been takers back then to finance a risky venture IF everybody knew then what we know now? Absolutely. But they didn't. So why aren't the hoardes of takers who do know about VOIP now NOT buying VPLM now? Simple: They assume that Goliath is correct, and that Goliath was there first. And they content themselves with the notion that VPLM is a patent troll. But they are wrong. These things do happen - little guys get there first, but run out of money. It happens with great regularity. Again, just my opinion - I respect yours - just don't happen to agree.
But Digifonica did not have anywhere near the financing, and corporate infrastructure to pull off such a feat, regardless of the intrinsic value of its patented technology - and Apple, Verizon, and other Goliaths absolutely did - and absolutely took this technology forward, not doing a proper job of due diligence, or otherwise simply, and deliberately ignoring Digifonica's prior art, betting that this little David couldn't possibly prevail. Hence our current situation. Hence the evidence that a legal team so clearly talented and capable would agree to the extent that they, themselves would bet their own respective "farms" on doing this work on the come.... My humble opinion and observation after watching this process for 15 years.
My Roth is with E-Trade - You'll have to open an account with a house that trades this stock, and purchase new shares inside of that Roth. Probably won't let you transfer shares - just buy new ones - and if you want to retain your original position, not increase it, just sell the others outside of the Roth after you secure the others... That's what I did.
"lol, otter nonsense, VLPM is a scam which I have proven, $33mil in losses, no revenues, big dilution and AS RAISE OR RS COMING!! Mark this post"
Yes, it seems that "Otter" nonsense is what we're dealing with here, since you have "PROVEN' nothing, except an ability to repeat statements with no factual basis or offer of proof outside of your clearly defined opinion.
Please enlighten us with your "PROOF" as you call it - and don't bother with inflammatory statements, conjecture, conclusions gained by drawing irrational and unrelated concepts together. "Proof" is what you offered, so, please, by all means - let's see it.
I found the most reassuring part of yesterday's announcement to be the reminder that May 9th was the deadline - as in NO MORE OPPORTUNITIES for Apple, et al to file additional IPR petitions.
As a shareholder in a long game, one can often feel hopeless, as if the Goliaths of the world have you by the delicates in their ability to endlessly run the little guy out of money with no end in sight. That's a standard ploy - but by creating a one year deadline for challenge, and no appeal process for a denied IPR there is a sort of check and balance written into this process.
I'm not saying that I feel the PTAB is above reproach - quite the opposite - in what logical world can an appointee who is a Federal Judge get away with holding multi-millions in shares, and have a long employment history with the same company they stand in judgment for, and NOT be required to recuse themselves? Nothing to see here, folks...just move along please...
However, what I do find that gives me hope is that we now know the full extent of the challenges - and more importantly, our legal team knows the full extent of the challenges, and can measure quite accurately whether or not they are willing to stay in this battle and see it to it's conclusion.
That's huge. Very, very important.
That isn't even logical. There are always precisely the same number of sales as buys. It's a universal fact. Now - were there more offers to buy than were filled, or more shares available at a certain price, than buyers willing to pay that price? That's called a market.
Happy Friday! As a LONG at this stock - getting in well below our current level, and having made 100X original investment back trading along the way, I notice a few things of interest this week:
322 Individual share holders per latest audited financials - precisely ONE institutional holder: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/vplm/institutional-holdings
Approximately the same 10-15 consistent voices and posters for YEARS on this board - correlating to the fact we have only 322 investors - Suddenly, from out of nowhere, two brand new fresh faces appear simultaneously, and educate us as to the fact that the sky is, quite suddening and imminently, falling.
I want to thank these folks from the bottom of my heart and bank book, as this little dance and "SHORTING" event has allowed me to move around some stocks into Roth IRA accounts where, once the IPRs are settled, and should VOIP PAL prevail, which remains a very clear and distinct possibility - certainly more likely than the idea that the PTAB, many known and consistent well respected professionals and teams of top lawyers have somehow conspired together to create a planned farce in order to steal lunch money from 322 people.... Well, I thank you because I will, now, have precisely zero tax consequence on my capital gains. Happy Friday!!
Here's the link to HL Quist's podcast regarding Thomas Sawyer's letter to PTAB, et al - and his analysis of this situation. Interesting: http://hlquist.libsyn.com/webpage/2017/05/07
A deficit is not a debt. A debt indicates money that has not been paid out and is still due. Running in the red during R&D phases is not at all unusual... maybe check your basic understanding of business terms?
Thanks for posting this - can it be a "sticky"? I'd love to be able to go back easily and reference.
Question: Can anybody state, with certainty and actual knowledge, not speculation - Are there a finite number of grounds on which these patents can be invalidated - and if so, does the combination of the arguments in the IPRs from United Patents, and Apple cover virtually all of them...
Or, if not - are we possibly looking at Twitter, or somebody else instituting yet another IPR from a different angle, a different claim construction that hasn't been tried yet, hoping to drag this process out indefinitely? It would be helpful to know if we are looking at the whole of this process, or if the strategy from the litigants, and potential litigants is to chip away at the staying power long enough to run Voip-Pal out of money, shares and support?
Thoughts?
Loving the United Patents denial. Complete denials happen in only about 25% of the cases. And UP, does not like to lose, and doesn't lose often - their own rate of denial is likely quite a bit lower than 25%. That's good news no matter how you slice it.
Here's a good read for those who have the time and inclination regarding the inner workings of these IPRS:
http://www.ipo.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/PTAB_DenialsPart2.pdf
Go VPLM
Sorry to be late to this party, but I've been travelling.
A court recommending a dismissal without prejudice in the event of 2 concurrent trials in play says exactly nothing about the case. It says, we are wasting the court's time here until the other court matter is decided. Please come back after that. It does not signal either a victory or a loss. It is procedural. Happens virtually, every single day in the courts.
Very encouraged having read a reasonable number of excerpts from the 80 or so page document. Upon reading the IPR filings, my instant impression was that there had been a smugness, some far-reaching conclusions upon the part of the petitioners that any sane person would be in agreement with their position. Voip-Pal's response smacks that smugness, and introduces the very clear fact that the petitioner(s) have failed, in their arrogance, to satisfy even the most elementary and basic tenets of their job in having made such broad and unsupported assumptions.
Pride goeth before the fall. Methinks that the USPTO Examiners may, very well, based upon the valid and factual arguments presented in Voip-Pal's response, find the petition to be, not only an arrogant slap in the face of the lawful and procedural rules of these types of proceedings, but also, significant enough of a deriliction of the petitioner's duties in this matter to bring forth and demonstrate clearly their position. Nobody likes an arrogant ass - most especially one who behaves as if it is so large, so powerful that it can behave with inpunity in it's efforts to squash the little guy.
We'll see. It's up to the USPTO at this point - but Bravo to Knobbe Marten, et al... and folks, it ain't nearly over. Let's listen for the Fat Lady's solo. It's due in the next 90 days.
My best guess is that with the IPR comes the basis, one way or the other of any position on infringement. Since burning up lawyer fees to prosecute and support both activities simultaneously would be silly and wasteful, it seems like a logical decision to agree to the stipulation. Only if Voip-Pal wasn't terribly confident in the eventuality of vindication in the IPR would there be a reason to insist upon moving forward with the suit post haste, IMHO
Thanks - very well stated
I agree - that's why I suggested it here. It's a smart move, and somebody on the board ought to be pursuing it, if they aren't already.
I was talking about a concept. Businesses regularly engage in forward thinking purchases to hedge bets in a world of uncertain futures.
It's a damn good idea, and a smart CEO would consider it, if they are holding a letter giving them Prescriptive Notice of infringement, especially under the Supreme Court ruling expanding the powers of the court to award larger damages for willful infringement. As a CEO of a potential infringer, a fraction of what I'd be expected to pay, should this case unfold in Voip-Pal's favor, to put me in the "Non Willful and Actively Cooperative" category would be a solid business investment in my company's future.
this can still go either way, and an insurance policy would be a wise thing for a potential infringer to consider offering a company with current cash flow issues.
I agree with you - I just think that with some cards now actually on the table... specifics that can be examined by professionals both for and against the validity of the patents in question, and the quality of the players involved - the legal teams on BOTH sides are worthy opponents, and there is no obvious, cut and dried outcome here. It could go either way, or a combination of both.
A company who is NOT on the radar, but is clearly infringing should the patents hold up could likely benefit from negotiating an "insurance policy" if you will, by prenegotiating a discounted license fee, and paying on that now, locking in savings in the event that the patents are upheld. Companies do this kind of concept all the time. Southwest purchased oil futures ahead of price increases, and in doing so, successfully secured their place as the price leader and dominance in the market place by being able to outlast their competitors who couldn't afford to give away fares as low, due to oil prices.
A strategic approach to obtain $1,500,000 in funding, in lieu of crowdsourcing is a good idea, and a much better one than diluting shares, n'est-ce pas? Anybody on the board listening?
I agree. I do believe, however, that if I were a potential infringer, that I might be doing my own dd right about now, and having my experts take a look at both the claims, and also the arguments made in the two IPRs, to hedge my bets. Perhaps Voip-pal should be talking to a few of these about a preliminary licensing agreement that would run with the patents should they be validated, at a discount from the face market value that those licenses would likely be offered at, if or when the IPRs are over. That seems like a much more feasible scenario for interim financing than crowd funding - a discount license for first comers.....
Everything hinges on the IPRs - Yes, both Apple and United Patents present worthy opponents that take IP prosecution very seriously and often win. But they don't always. Knobbe Martens also wins, and is a worthy adversary. Apple and UP are forced into a position to delve into this IPR situation, whereas the legal counsel ... no amateurs mind you... for Voip-Pal have taken this matter on contingency, meaning, they don't get paid if they aren't successful. Knobbe Martens also employs patent scientists - this isn't some law firm with a couple lawyers who don't really understand what they are looking at:
https://knobbe.com/careers/patent-scientists
I don't know a lot of top lawyers who work for free, or risk a high profile embarrasment in their main field of practice lightly. This is nowhere near being over. Malak for all his foibles - must have some goodies, or else he has Jedi mind powers to convince not only some uniformed stock holders - but more importantly, many proven experts in the field who have seen enough to bank years of work and their professional reputations on this. I'll defer to their expertise. IMHO
Thanks for an attempt to bring the real issues back to light - As entertaining as constant and unverifiable opinions can be over minutia, personalities and second guessing the BOD without sufficient information to do so, certain other issues actually remain germane to the discussion.
Here's a reference that includes a timeline for an IPR and next steps. Within the first 3 months, Voip-Pal should be bringing a Patent Owner's Preliminary Response (POPR) to the table. There are any number of ways an IPR can be dismissed, partially invalidated. What is put forth during this step will be very illuminating, IMHO.
http://www.finnegan.com/resources/articles/articlesdetail.aspx?news=a1991ab3-059d-482e-a97c-0ba4b714eb1c
It's a stretch, at this point to have a qualified investor opt to take .05 shares which are restricted, when the market value of those same free trading shares is .01 or less in difference -
Until/unless there is some indication of evidence that even some of the UP counterclaims are invalid, I'm afraid they won't be terribly successful lining up qualified investors to take a silly bargain. Time will tell - but they might have anticipated this move from UP. UP could, literally file a bunch of nonsense, (and this may very well be the case) most of which gets dismissed eventually, and still have the effect of disrupting the investors to a point where all support disappears. It's not over till the fat lady sings. My nickel is staying put. :)
The current price has everything to do with the current state of affairs and the uncertainty before us, that will be addressed, one way or the other, as the IPR evolves. Comparisons to the past PPS as a development stage company grew is irrelevant.
I have read the IPR - briefly - and I agree with a few comments here that United's claims of the 2 prior art instances is a stretch of the imagination. I also note that their haughty, dismissive tone smacks of uncertainty and arrogance, rather than factual specifics. United is a mega-monster created by the goliaths in the IP world to bully those who would dare confront their dominance with actual innovation. shame on them. Our patent laws were designed to protect innovation and encourage it. The powerful, backed by a bought and paid for government is doing the opposite here in allowing a "United Patents" of the world to exist. Are there trolls? Yes - but those are cases to be decided individually. Trying to create one big deterrent to anybody to protect their intellectual property, lest they meet the block bully is wrong. The USPTO knows this. They will not cave and change their decisions just because the block bully tells them to.