It says this patent covers using SSL with RC4. SSL dates back to Netscape, was released in 1995, and has no one involved in it has anything to do with the patent holder here. RC4 was designed in 1987 by Ron Rivest who also has nothing to do with this case.

Someone named Michael Jones patented using SSL with RC4. Which in seems was a known and used combination at the time he did so, as was testified by the expert witness? But the jury thought that not relevant.

The patent would seem to avoidable if say using AES instead.

Caution: I don't know what I am talking about and just looked the above up on wikipedia, which I probably misunderstood. Hopefully someone who understands this in more depth will post.