Vonage Settles With Verizon for at Least $80M

netbuzz writes "Fresh off agreeing to pay Sprint Nextel $80 million earlier this month, Vonage has now agreed to compensate Verizon at least $80 million to settle their patent dispute, and the total could hit $117 million depending on the outcome of appeals Vonage has pending. 'If Vonage wins rehearing on either the '574 or '711 patent or if the injunction is vacated as to the '574 or '711 patent, Vonage will pay Verizon $80 million. If Vonage does not win rehearing on either the '574 or '711 patent, or if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction, Vonage will pay Verizon $117.5 million.' And, of course, don't forget AT&T just recently opened charges against the company as well."

Pattent Trolls

[by Anonymous Coward]

"And, of course, don't forget AT&T just recently opened charges against the company as well."

yea because AT&T invented voice over packet technology in friggen 2002. It never existed before that.

voice over frame relay has been around for more than 20 years. telco's are a bunch of selfish a-holes who make outrageous claims that are allowed to go unchallenged. Its time for some vigilante justice... how about some random knee cappings ala Nancy Kerrigan on all members of the telcom board of directors.

Re:

[Volante3192 (953645)]

What I particularly liked about that AT&T remark is how can there be so much overlap between the Sprint, Verizon and AT&T patents without SOME of them being kicked out for prior art?

Re:

[stinerman (812158)]

As the AC commented, that's bloody unlikely. I might be able to get by. I could switch to Alltel for cellphone service. Grandma? Don't think so.

Re:Pattent Trolls

[jonesy16 (595988)]

I have to agree with the other poster whose comment got modded down. While I agree that not buying services from these companies would hurt them (duh), it isn't feasible. In most parts of the country you don't have too many options for a) land telephone, b) internet access, c) cell phone w/ reception. Odds are that in order to get at least one of those three services you're going to have to pony up to Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint. T-Mobile and US Cellular have pretty poor reception where I am. Verizon and Comcast are the only internet providers (and that's really a lesser of two evils) unless you want to go wireless (satellite, etc, $$$). And Verizon is the only POTS provider. So the only way that I can hurt them is to cease my communication to the outside world.

The size of these companies and their control are beyond the scope of what consumers can affect. They muscle competition off of the playing field which has led to the helplessness of consumers at this point. But hey, it's part of the cycle. Another decade or so, after AT&T/Verizon/Sprint have all merged again and widened our collective sphincters a good couple of inches, maybe the governemtn will break them up and we'll start the whole cycle again.

Re:Pattent Trolls

[timeOday (582209)]

I hate the local telco so much I went "vonage only." Through these lawsuits I'll still be paying the local telco anyways. You just can't escape.

Re:

[HumanPenguin (889927)]

Same here.

but I am still stuck with the voids surrounded by sphincter muscles Comcast. It really is impossible to get a telephone line without one of the big phone companies or the cable monopoly now.

Also as the main reason I have vonage is for free calls and a local phone line in the UK.

There is no other US alternative.

The world IS getting smaller and technology is passing the big Telco's because they have sat on their monopolies rather then use their innovations.

instead of providing services customers wan

Re:

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

So the only way that I can hurt them is to cease my communication to the outside world.

Okay, so where I am there is only Verizon and Bright House Networks for high-speed internet and Verizon is the only POTS provider. I use Bright House for Internet, Vonage for VOIP. I don't have a landline. I use Sprint for wireless because I'm stuck in a contract and unwilling to pay to get out of it. So of all the companies you listed, I only use one of them. I could just as easily switch to T-Mobile, though, once my contract is up.

Like another poster said, you pick the most influential. Everyone boy

Re:

[jonesy16 (595988)]

Sometimes it's not even as simple as just changing the "brand" of your high speed internet. In our town there is also a local provider called TBC for DSL internet. However, if you dig deep enough you find out they are just reselling you a Verizon DSL line. Congrats on limiting the damage to one company so far, I hope that our options continue to increase ;-)

Re:Pattent Trolls

[Volante3192 (953645)]

Hit them in their pocketbook? You know who that *really* hits, right? Customers.

Hit them where it REALLY hurts. Pull away their sole right to the lines and put it in a government owned utility company whose sole purpose is to upgrade and maintain the lines. Slap em with common carrier status. Stick em in the Tower of London and make them part of the tour.

We can do a lot better than just 'pocketbook' here.

Re:

[jimstapleton (999106)]

Actually, they don't have to go cold turkey.

Find the most offensive one or two. Boycott them. They are forced to change to stay in business.

Suddenly, the ones that you didn't boycott lose their market share as the formerly boycotted companies pick up a lot of clients. Even though they have had profit for a while, the non-boycotted companies will find their coffers significantly less lined. They now have to fall into line, and make the same changes.

The trick isn't boycotting everyone, just one that can be in

Re:

[Shakrai (717556)]

Find the most offensive one or two

That would be AT&T, followed by Verizon.

Boycott them

You can boycott them at one level but you can't escape the fact that sooner or later your money (however indirectly) will end up in their hands. I ditched Verizon POTS service for Verizon Wireless and later ditched them for T-Mobile. Now my money is going to little pink instead of big red, right?

Of course T-Mobile has to purchase their connections to the PSTN from someone...... gee, I wonder who that is in New York State?

Granted, it's still somewhat eff

Vonage looks great!

[Big Nothing (229456)]

This "Vonage" company seems stable and solid - where can i purchase some stock in the company?

What if it wins both patents?

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

What if it wins both patents? Vonage shouldn't have to pay anything. Instead, they've agreed to be $80 million in protection money to the mobster Verizon. Can anyone say RICO?

what is this going to do for other VoIP providers?

[Lumpy (12016)]

I chose Broadvoice over Vonnage because I wanted Open access. I.E. use my gear unlocked, use asterisk, etc...

Will Other Voip companies be targeted after Vonnage is decimated by the telcos?

Re:what is this going to do for other VoIP provide

[cHiphead (17854)]

Yes, but probably only if they go with a national push for market share.

Note to self...

[JK_the_Slacker (1175625)]

...Call lawyer. Have him sue Vonage for patent infringement.

You know?

[Penguinisto (415985)]

This is going to sound bad, but it's stories like this that make me feel not so bad when some tiny company (like, say, Eolas) comes along and hammers a big company.

IMHO, software patents in and of themselves suck, but there's a bit of me hoping like Hell that Verizon, AT&T, and all their kith and kin get slammed (soon) with a multi-billion-dollar patent lawsuit from some tiny company no one has ever heard of. Something big enough to hurt.

(or at least something big enough to get legislative attention and end this whole software patent silliness...)

/P

Tell me again

[zappepcs (820751)]

how software patents are supposed to protect innovation?
Seems pretty clear that they are only being used to protect big businesses, or as weapons by patent trolls. When the patent system itself became a business (patent trolls) it should have been the wake up call to fix what is obviously broken.

I know that companies are in business to make money, but this kind of heavy handed business practice is not necessary. This type of situation is an example of exactly why people would not be encouraged to start a business. You have to invest a lot of money/resources to ensure that you will not be sued into oblivion just to risk starting up a business. Software patents are WRONG, and the USPTO/patent system is BROKEN.

Yes, we all know that, now what do we do about it?

For Sale

[s31523 (926314)]

Maybe AT&T/Sprint/Verizon should just buy Vonage. I mean Vonage has a presence in the market place, and they must have some of their own patents, right? This could be a way for one of them to take more of the VOIP market, which will continue to boom as networking infrastructure improves.

I know this is wrong

[Fear the Clam (230933)]

I know I'm supposed to support plucky little Vonage and hate the big telcos and really hate the idea of patents. It's a no-brainer how I'm supposed to feel here.

But honestly? After years of those hoo hoo, hoo hoo hoo ads I'm pleased, nay, pumped, even amped, that those Vonage jerkoffs are getting nailed again. I don't even care why because the ads were so obnoxious. So suck on that, Vonage. And take your fucking ads with you, bitches.

Oh yeah, and mod me down for this, for I have sinned.

I used to feel bad for Vonage

[Nigel_Powers (880000)]

Until I canceled my service with them. I was hassled by their offshored customer retention staff, offered months of free service, pleas for me to leave my account on inactive status, anything except cancel. And when I insisted, I then found out about the $39 disconnect fee -- what a crock.

Fuck Vonage!

Re:

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

Once they finish paying all the phone companies for the patents, then the phone and cable companies will come back and demand extra payment to use their networks. Otherwise, Vonage customers will watch their service degrade until it's unusable. This will continue until Vonage is bankrupt.

Exactly. All of this corporate racketeering by the telcos has got to be stopped. Hello? EFF? Where are you?

Re:

[betterunixthanunix (980855)]

Uhm, you state your support for Ron Paul in your signature. He is a libertarian, and he is the last person on Earth who will have the government interfere with the "free market." Not to start a slashdot political discussion, but honestly, if you want to support a candidate who might actually do something, you need to look for someone like Ralph Nader (who did fight big corporations, and won, prior to the god-awful Reagen presidency).

Re:

[Applekid (993327)]

Actually, he's under the Republican flag in Congress. I don't think he's likely to win the Republican primary, though, so it'd remain to be seen if he'd want to jump ships to the Libertarian side of things, but they've already got their 4 candidates lined up.

Even if he WAS Libertarian, it wouldn't be outside their scope to reform patent law, since it's a government-backed and granted monopoly and defended in a court of law at that.

The nit pick then would be that it takes Congress to do that and not The Pres

Re:

[betterunixthanunix (980855)]

Except that the telco problem is not a patent one, it is a monopoly one. Patents may be contributing factors, but without any government interference the telcos would be forced to form a trust and exclude companies like Vonage, something that they wouldn't require patents to do. Historically, that is why we started having a government regulated economy.