YOU ARE AT:Archived ArticlesDamages doubled in Visto win against Seven

Damages doubled in Visto win against Seven

Visto Corp. claimed victory against rival mobile e-mail service provider Seven Networks Inc. after a U.S. District Court doubled the damages from an earlier ruling.

The Redwood City, Calif.-based developer said it was awarded $7.7 million by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in a final judgment of its patent-infringement case against Seven. The amount includes $3.6 million in damages the jury awarded Visto earlier this year; Seven also was ordered to pay Visto’s legal fees.

“Today’s decision heralds a victory for true innovation and for lawful invention, whether it is conceived by a large corporation or by a passionate few toiling in the dim lights of a garage,” Visto CEO Brian Bogosian crowed. “Seven’s unlawful misappropriation of Visto’s technology has been uncovered for what it is: a flagrant violation of our property rights.”

But Seven also claimed a victory of sorts following the judgment, noting that the court dismissed one of Visto’s five patent claims against Seven. The court also stayed Visto’s request for an immediate injunction pending appeal, allowing Seven to continue to offer its services.

“No new develoments are expected in this case until early 2008,” according to a statement released by Seven, “when the appeals process is due to complete.”

And it appears both firms will be able to pay their lawyers through the appeal: Seven last week scored $42 million in an oversubscribed round of funding, and Visto recently closed a $51 million round, bringing its overall funding to a staggering $250 million.

Visto is also pursuing patent-infringement suits against Research In Motion Ltd. and Good Technologies Inc.

“We are pleased with the ruling and grateful to the court for its diligent attention to the case,” said Kent Thexton, Seven’s executive chairman. “With a strong case on appeal, strong balance sheet, thriving business and our turn in the court in June we are well positioned to drive this dispute to resolution.”

ABOUT AUTHOR