• News
  • SAN DIEGO
  • Technology

Websense prevails in patent infringement case

Related Special Reports

A Delaware jury Thursday found in favor of San Diego-based Websense, ruling that the computer virus detection company did not infringe on the patent of a competitor.

The jury also ruled that the patent being asserted by Finjan, which brought the lawsuit, is invalid.

Websense (Nasdaq: WBSN) was represented by the law firm Cooley, with partner Anthony “Tony” Stiegler taking the lead.

"This is an area of exponential growth for the company, and is an area they expect to expand in for many years to come, so this is a very significant victory for the company," Stiegler said.

The patent at issue concerns computer security and detecting malware before it reaches the client computer.

The patent taught methods and systems to protect computers in a network from malware by scanning “downloadables” at a gateway. The gateway looks for suspicious operations and blocks downloadables containing such operations after comparison with a security policy.

The Cooley team established that the Websense-accused products do not identify a list of suspicious computer operations at the gateway and that the gateway in the Websense-accused products does not perform a comparison against a policy.

"We proved that Websense technology was different," Stiegler said.

Other members of the Websense legal team were Cooley partner John Kyle and associates Paul Batcher, Brian Lam, Erin Goodsell, José Rodriguez and Jennifer Fontaine, all based in San Diego.

Before trial, Finjan sought tens of millions of dollars in past and future damages.

Leave Your Comment

Comments are moderated by SDDT, in accordance with the SDDT Comment Policy, and may not appear on this commentary until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.

SDDT Comment Policy: SDDT encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. All comments should be relevant to the topic and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. You are solely responsible for your own comments, the consequences of posting those comments, and the consequences of any reliance by you on the comments of others. By submitting your comment, you hereby give SDDT the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying and other information you provide via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. SDDT Privacy Statement.

User Response
0 UserComments

Leave Your Comment

Comments are moderated by SDDT, in accordance with the SDDT Comment Policy, and may not appear on this commentary until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.

SDDT Comment Policy: SDDT encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. All comments should be relevant to the topic and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. You are solely responsible for your own comments, the consequences of posting those comments, and the consequences of any reliance by you on the comments of others. By submitting your comment, you hereby give SDDT the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying and other information you provide via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. SDDT Privacy Statement.