Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	NOTE 11. Commitments and Contingencies Viaimport Litigation On May 22, 2012, a lawsuit was filed against the Company in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic (Case No. FP-12-461) by Viaimport, SRL, a former customer of the Company, and served on the Company on July 12, 2012. The complaint alleges breach of contract and seeks U.S. $1 million in damages. The Company believes that this case is without merit and intends to vigorously defend itself. In addition, on August 31, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit against Viaimport and its principal, Omar Hassan (defendants), in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County Florida (Case No. 12-34647CA32) for non-payment of purchase obligations aggregating $288,559 and other damages. On March 26, 2013, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the case, but such motion was denied in its entirety by the Court on July 17, 2013. Defendants answered the complaint and filed a counterclaim against the Company mirroring the Dominican Republic complaint on August 12, 2013. On September 12, 2013, the Company replied to Defendants’ defenses, served them with a discovery request and on October 3, 2013 filed a Notice of Trial. We do not believe at this time that these cases will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. However, the ultimate legal and financial liability with respect to these matters cannot be estimated with certainty and the Dominican Republic case is complicated by its foreign venue. Steelhead Litigation On January 14, 2013, Steelhead Licensing LLC (“Steelhead”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,491,834. Steelhead was seeking injunctive relief as well as the recovery of unspecified monetary damages. On May 24, 2013 we entered into a Settlement and Patent License Agreement with Steelhead whereby we denied any wrongdoing and received a fully paid up and perpetual license to Steelhead patents in exchange for a one-time cash payment of an immaterial amount. The lawsuit has now been dismissed with prejudice. Wyncomm Litigation On April 12, 2013, Wyncomm LLC (“Wyncomm”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,506,866. Wyncomm is seeking recovery of unspecified monetary damages. We do not believe we infringe the Wyncomm patent and intend to defend ourselves vigorously. Due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation, we cannot identify probable or estimable damages related to the lawsuit at this time. Blue Spike Litigation On October 8, 2013, Blue Spike, LLC (“Blue Spike”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,745,569. Blue Spike is seeking recovery of unspecified monetary damages. We do not believe we infringe the Blue Spike patent and intend to defend ourselves vigorously. Due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation, we cannot identify probable or estimable damages related to the lawsuit at this time. The Company may become involved in certain other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the normal course of business. Other than as described above, as of the filing date of this report, the Company did not have any significant litigation outstanding.

NOTE 11. Commitments and Contingencies

Viaimport Litigation

On May 22, 2012, a lawsuit was filed against the Company in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic (Case No. FP-12-461) by Viaimport, SRL, a former customer of the Company, and served on the Company on July 12, 2012. The complaint alleges breach of contract and seeks U.S. $1 million in damages. The Company believes that this case is without merit and intends to vigorously defend itself. In addition, on August 31, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit against Viaimport and its principal, Omar Hassan (defendants), in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County Florida (Case No. 12-34647CA32) for non-payment of purchase obligations aggregating $288,559 and other damages. On March 26, 2013, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the case, but such motion was denied in its entirety by the Court on July 17, 2013. Defendants answered the complaint and filed a counterclaim against the Company mirroring the Dominican Republic complaint on August 12, 2013. On September 12, 2013, the Company replied to Defendants’ defenses, served them with a discovery request and on October 3, 2013 filed a Notice of Trial. We do not believe at this time that these cases will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. However, the ultimate legal and financial liability with respect to these matters cannot be estimated with certainty and the Dominican Republic case is complicated by its foreign venue.

Steelhead Litigation

On January 14, 2013, Steelhead Licensing LLC (“Steelhead”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,491,834. Steelhead was seeking injunctive relief as well as the recovery of unspecified monetary damages. On May 24, 2013 we entered into a Settlement and Patent License Agreement with Steelhead whereby we denied any wrongdoing and received a fully paid up and perpetual license to Steelhead patents in exchange for a one-time cash payment of an immaterial amount. The lawsuit has now been dismissed with prejudice.

Wyncomm Litigation

On April 12, 2013, Wyncomm LLC (“Wyncomm”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,506,866. Wyncomm is seeking recovery of unspecified monetary damages. We do not believe we infringe the Wyncomm patent and intend to defend ourselves vigorously. Due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation, we cannot identify probable or estimable damages related to the lawsuit at this time.

Blue Spike Litigation

On October 8, 2013, Blue Spike, LLC (“Blue Spike”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleging that certain of our products infringe claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,745,569. Blue Spike is seeking recovery of unspecified monetary damages. We do not believe we infringe the Blue Spike patent and intend to defend ourselves vigorously. Due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation, we cannot identify probable or estimable damages related to the lawsuit at this time.

The Company may become involved in certain other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the normal course of business. Other than as described above, as of the filing date of this report, the Company did not have any significant litigation outstanding.