![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
They are marketing the new "Gabriel" server — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.233.120.5 ( talk) 20:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
That unused software seems inline with behavior of other patent trolls in that it essentially derives no significant revenue from this. https://www.patentprogress.org/2016/04/08/virnetx-patent-troll/ 89.255.225.223 ( talk) 00:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
89.225.225.233, the article you posted was written by a legal blog called patentprogress.org. It is not a neutral source for information and should be taken with a grain of salt. The writer is Matt Levy, gives his subjective opinion that this company is a patent troll. Wikipedia is not a place for subjective opinions, it is an encyclopedia, not a blog. See WP:NPV
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_po
Facts are, this company actually produces software called Gabriel Connect for desktop and mobile devices. It is desktop software is available for download via its website and is available for MacOS and Windows platforms. Its mobile software is available for download via the Google Play and Apple Store.
Patent Facts ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
VirnetX. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Just adding another voice here disputing the neutrality of the article. Nowhere is mentioned that all patents at issue in the on-going VirnetX/Apple trials have been ruled invalid by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), an expert-staffed agency, part of the USPTO itself which issues the patents. They have essentially declared they were issued in error due to an interpretation of prior art, although not all appeals have been exhausted.
This agency works in parallel with the Federal Court process which relies on testimony to lay juries. Here is a citation to a more recent Court decision against VirnetX which has occurred since this article was updated in 2014, e.g.
https://www.law360.com/articles/871089/fed-circ-upholds-ptab-nixing-of-claims-in-virnetx-patents
Lastly, the statement "Apple's engineering staff ... knew they were violating ..." is not supported by the Court of Appeals decision cited. Apple's viewpoint is that "VPN on Demand" using a DNS-triggered VPN setup is straightforward from existing practice, via implementation of openly-specified work sponsored by the IETF, and other companies like Cisco. In summary this article is not just biased but is woefully out-of-date. James Alien Woods ( talk) 23:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Another voice for the neutrality debate: much of the "NPOV" content appears to be coming from small selection of edits, such as this or these or this deletion or this set; many of which are either deleted accounts or single-purpose ones. There clearly appears to be some astroturfing going on here. ILikeTau ( talk) 22:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I have applied ECP for one week., This is to allow experienced editors attracted from WP:ANI to edit the article, while hopefully preventing further edit warring. Guy ( help!) 19:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
@ GretLomborg: felt that my changes to VirnetX were not due. Gret can you elaborate a bit on why and which sections in particular? Happy to compromise on this. Deltagammaz ( talk) 23:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Some or all of the changes may be promotional in tone. |
NOTE: Suggested text has been deleted due to copyright concerns 2601:602:D080:AB0:7813:E666:FDD5:5BF2 ( talk) 20:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
@ NeutralEd: Your addition of a controversy section, in addition to going against the accurate advice at WP:CSECTION that there should not be a controversy section at all, has some very basic problems at well. It makes original research claims about the company's place in the general discussion, cited to examples rather than sources making claim that that's the company's place in the larger discussion. More than one of the section's sources don't even mentioned the company that's the topic of this article. I have removed that new addition. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 22:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
The Company derives revenue from licensing and royalty fees from contracts with customersand
Our portfolio of intellectual property is the foundation of our business model.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
They are marketing the new "Gabriel" server — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.233.120.5 ( talk) 20:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
That unused software seems inline with behavior of other patent trolls in that it essentially derives no significant revenue from this. https://www.patentprogress.org/2016/04/08/virnetx-patent-troll/ 89.255.225.223 ( talk) 00:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
89.225.225.233, the article you posted was written by a legal blog called patentprogress.org. It is not a neutral source for information and should be taken with a grain of salt. The writer is Matt Levy, gives his subjective opinion that this company is a patent troll. Wikipedia is not a place for subjective opinions, it is an encyclopedia, not a blog. See WP:NPV
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_po
Facts are, this company actually produces software called Gabriel Connect for desktop and mobile devices. It is desktop software is available for download via its website and is available for MacOS and Windows platforms. Its mobile software is available for download via the Google Play and Apple Store.
Patent Facts ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
VirnetX. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Just adding another voice here disputing the neutrality of the article. Nowhere is mentioned that all patents at issue in the on-going VirnetX/Apple trials have been ruled invalid by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), an expert-staffed agency, part of the USPTO itself which issues the patents. They have essentially declared they were issued in error due to an interpretation of prior art, although not all appeals have been exhausted.
This agency works in parallel with the Federal Court process which relies on testimony to lay juries. Here is a citation to a more recent Court decision against VirnetX which has occurred since this article was updated in 2014, e.g.
https://www.law360.com/articles/871089/fed-circ-upholds-ptab-nixing-of-claims-in-virnetx-patents
Lastly, the statement "Apple's engineering staff ... knew they were violating ..." is not supported by the Court of Appeals decision cited. Apple's viewpoint is that "VPN on Demand" using a DNS-triggered VPN setup is straightforward from existing practice, via implementation of openly-specified work sponsored by the IETF, and other companies like Cisco. In summary this article is not just biased but is woefully out-of-date. James Alien Woods ( talk) 23:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Another voice for the neutrality debate: much of the "NPOV" content appears to be coming from small selection of edits, such as this or these or this deletion or this set; many of which are either deleted accounts or single-purpose ones. There clearly appears to be some astroturfing going on here. ILikeTau ( talk) 22:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I have applied ECP for one week., This is to allow experienced editors attracted from WP:ANI to edit the article, while hopefully preventing further edit warring. Guy ( help!) 19:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
@ GretLomborg: felt that my changes to VirnetX were not due. Gret can you elaborate a bit on why and which sections in particular? Happy to compromise on this. Deltagammaz ( talk) 23:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Some or all of the changes may be promotional in tone. |
NOTE: Suggested text has been deleted due to copyright concerns 2601:602:D080:AB0:7813:E666:FDD5:5BF2 ( talk) 20:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
@ NeutralEd: Your addition of a controversy section, in addition to going against the accurate advice at WP:CSECTION that there should not be a controversy section at all, has some very basic problems at well. It makes original research claims about the company's place in the general discussion, cited to examples rather than sources making claim that that's the company's place in the larger discussion. More than one of the section's sources don't even mentioned the company that's the topic of this article. I have removed that new addition. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 22:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
The Company derives revenue from licensing and royalty fees from contracts with customersand
Our portfolio of intellectual property is the foundation of our business model.