Nikon is acting plain stupid. The Viltrox lenses need Z cameras.
Nikon's profit margins on lenses are much higher than on cameras, so selling a camera and no lenses is bad business for Nikon. Nikon has previously said that they will allow 3rd parties to make lenses that fill gaps in Nikon's line-up, so Viltrox making a DX AF 9mm f/2.8 or an FX AF 14mm f/4 is one thing, but making an FX AF 135mm f/1.8 with performance approaching Nikon's for US$899 is quite another.
Avoiding licensing payments is not the reason companies like Viltrox can sell good lenses cheaper than OEMs with factories in China - paper-thin profit margins appear to be the biggest factor - so even if Viltrox has to pay for an AF licence the lenses are unlikely to suddenly become as expensive as Nikon's. Reverse-engineered 3rd party lenses losing functionality with camera firmware changes has been a problem for years, and has affected many 3rd party lens and camera combinations. If no one is greedy (a big if, but we can hope), the legal action might actually benefit consumers if they end up paying a bit more for 3rd party lenses licensed by Nikon that will not stop working with firmware upgrades. (If Viltrox wins the case, in a lot of places Nikon could get into trouble for anti-competitive behaviour if it made firmware changes whose only purpose was to block Viltrox lenses, so that may be less of a risk than some people seem to think).
