Guernse21: Shash had indicated Finisar uses Si based, not GaAs, so likely no chance POET tech involved:

Let us have a look at your interpetation. She wrote: The major players all have BILLIONS invested in silicon tech. The big wafer fabs are almost exclusively silicon and they have to run for years to come before they pay out.

This I see as absolute valid point. But - we all know that Si can not lase. To build a VCSEL they most probably will have no choice but to use GaAs (ok also other 3/5 materials can do). Quite sure this is why Finisar is investing in this Texas plant. As POET /GT noted, old and outdated SI fabs easily can be retro-fitted to GaAs technology.

So Sash stated: Finisar is NOT using any PoET tech in their vscel work. 

Hmmm... This is Sash's opinion, OK. But - let us assume Finisar is knowing the POET capabilities (thanks to Mrs. Bashak), - why shouldn't they use it? Only if it would not work. But what we learned from POET is that their integrated chip worked - just the logic was not fast enough for their AOC (4th terminal problem...).
The alternative would be to use single distinct compounds, ( VCSEL + Si-CMOS chip + detector, all glued to one unit)  to be put in an i-Phone. Can be done, but I can imagine Apple to be eager to use the best available technology - which they should know through the TRAB... Small form factor, easy to manufacture in mass and to be tested on waver level, cheep in production - monolytic GaAS.

My question is: Now that the cooperation of Apple with Finisar is public - for which reasons would a cooperation Finisar/POET  still need protection? Why POET would not go public with such news?