Introduction - The Heart of the Problem The most recent blow to Vonage Holdings happened on May 3, 2007 when Federal Appeals Court has denied its request for retrial in the patent infringement case against Verizon Communications. In most likely scenario this was another nail driven into the coffin of the company that will soon go belly up. Vonage made a statement earlier stating that while the court decides their fate, the company is working on finding alternative technology that doesn't infringe on Verizon patents. "We're continuing to evaluate and develop workarounds for the technologies the jury found we're infringing upon" says Brooke Schulz, Vonage's vice president of communications.



Many journalists who closely follow patent dispute between Verizon Communications and Vonage Holdings claim that Vonage infringed on "key Verizon patents that deal with Internet calling, including technology used to connect Web calls to ordinary phone lines". In this brief article I will try to take a closer look at three patents that are at the heart of this dispute, comment on them and let readers decide how "key" they really are.

Commenting on first two Patents

One thing for sure - it will be extremely difficult for Vonage Holdings to find any alternative technologies that doesn't infringe on Verizon patents simply because they cover almost all aspects of VoIP communications. The jury found Vonage guilty in violating three of Verizon patents. Two of these patents (6,104,711 and 6,282,574) are very similar and deal with the concept of translating phone numbers into IP addresses and improving DNS Services. The thing is - these patents never ever mention an algorithm or a pseudo-code on how to solve the problem at hand. Verizon structured these patents in such a way that they are extremely broad in scope and highly generic.

Commenting on the third Patent

The last patent (numbered 6,359,880) is titled "Public wireless/cordless internet gateway" and it describes various business processes that involve in sending and receiving all types of VoIP signals over wireless networks. Once again - this patent does not contain any algorithms, data structures, pseudo-code or electrical diagrams; just generalized concepts and ideas.

Conclusion

As one can see, Verizon fight against Vonage was less about inappropriate use of strategic scientific information (or key ideas), but was designed to be a way to strangle the competition. Vonage was able to offer their phone services quicker and more cheaply then its bigger rival and this sealed its fate. I would hate to be in the shoes of Vonage founders who realize that they may lose the company they have built from the ground up on the grounds of legal technicalities. Many agree that Verizon patents are too broad and generic; however, U.S. District Court have interpreted them differently and it spells the end for Vonage.

The lesson that one should learn from the above mentioned litigation is that one should start thinking about getting a Patent very early. Otherwise you may realize later on that the invention you've struggled with for so long has been already patented very recently and you no longer have any rights on it. I've already discussed Provisional Patent Application - this may be a good starting point for many inventors.

If you are interesting in reading more, please visit that is dedicated in bringing quality information to the inventors all over the globe!

Robert P. Stewart - -