We just updated the story, and have a patent analysis coming soon, though not as instantly as i would have liked.

Vonage Infringed:

Patent #6,282,574:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6104711.PN.&OS=PN/6104711&RS=PN/6104711“>Patent #6,104,711:

Vonage Infringed, although not willfully:

Patent #6,359,880:

Far be it for me to try and apply patent law to these, but these links should get you a little further on digging into the details.

While you are in a self-flagellating mood, I will avail myself of the opportunity to press you for some reporting which has been missing from every account I’ve seen on this story so far.

There has been no actual technical explanation of what the 3 patents cover and what specific aspects of Vonage’s operations are deemed to violate them. Is that because it would be too geeky to be considered reporting? Do the reporters not understand it themselves? Does it require too much time to get the details?

The reporting has all referred vaguely to something about the ‘method of interconnecting with the PSTN’ for two of the patents, and about voicemail for the third.

Leaving voicemail aside for the moment, doesn’t Vonage use a softswitch + off-the-shelf media gateways to interconnect with the PSTN? (What other options are there?) Doesn’t that make every other VOIP carrier guilty of the same infringement as well? Where are the manufacturers of this equipment in this case? Don’t they have an interest in defending their customers, or at least challenging the patents with the PTO?

“A few vigilant readers wrote in and prompted us to further investigate ‘VoIP Inc.’s claims.’”

There weren’t any claims from VoIP, Inc. related to pending litigation between Vonage and Verizon….

You might want to revise your blog so that it’s accurate.