Well, accrording to the same article and the complaint (See Paragraph 32-35): "... In the suit and in an interview, Mr. Weiss said he had extensive meetings in

Well, accrording to the same article and the complaint (See Paragraph 32-35): "... In the suit and in an interview, Mr. Weiss said he had extensive meetings in 2010 with Visa officials, including its chief executive at the time, to discuss working together on the technology. In the interview, he said that Visa had signed a 10-year nondisclosure agreement to gain access to the technology, assigned engineers to fully understand the details, but then dropped further communication without securing a license. Mr. Weiss said he also wrote to Apple at the same time seeking to license his technology, but the iPhone maker never responded to his inquiries. ..." so clearly Visa had some working relationship with Weiss and was aware of Weiss's work in that area. Apple pretty much ignored Weiss. Considering Apple's past problems with suppliers, it's not surprising that they ignored him as well, knowing well that the technology was patented. Apple has had legal problems with wireless SEP (Standard Essential Patent) holders like Qualcomm, Nokia, Ericsson every time contral renewal is up. Apple believes that while their frivolous patents (eg, slide-to-unlock, rounded corners) are worth almost $8 per devices, SEPs held by those companies are worth $0.0000000x. QE, the law firm representing Weiss, probably made the right call in suing Apple first.