Intel ordered to Pay $2.2 Billion for Patent Infringement

Krenum

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
19,193
Bad news for intel. The hits keep coming. On the upside, I think we can all agree that it would be nice to be in the position to accept and pay a 2.2 Billion dollar lawsuit.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/i...22-billion-in-damages-for-patent-infringement

"A federal jury in Waco, Texas, ruled today that Intel must pay $2.18 billion in damages to VLSI, a semiconductor design firm, for violating two of its patents. Damages for one patent violation weigh in at $1.5 billion, while the other totals $675 million. The broader case is still ongoing, though, as VLSI has sued Intel in several states, spanning California, Delaware, and Texas, for damages associated with six other alleged patent violations".
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
VLSI now that is a company I have not heard about in a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time
Click to expand...

VLSI ceased to exist as a company in 1999 when they were bought by Phillips Semiconductor and rolled into NXP. NXP was spun off from Phillips in 2006.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-...-2-18-billion-after-losing-texas-patent-trial

This paints a picture of what looks like a convoluted patent troll case done via backroom deals and conglomerate shuffling of shell companies and purchased patent portfolios. The original VLSI technology ceased to be a company in 1999, but Phillips and later NXP retained the rights to the name. It looks like they brought the name out of retirement several years ago and assigned the two offending patents Intel supposedly infringed upon to the shell company VLSI Technology. The two patents in question were bought from Sigmatel and Freescale Semiconductor and assigned to VLSI Technology in 2019.

I would say this is less about Intel violating patents and more about some shadowy figure in a mega conglomerate looking to make a big payday. It furthers the notion of it being a patent troll being filed in Texas because the federal court in Texas has historically been very friendly to patent troll companies. Tyler, TX used to be a sleepy town 30 years ago, but now it is home to armies of lawyers.
 
N4CR said:
Wonder if they'll drag the payment out like they did with AMD..
Click to expand...
They shouldn’t have to pay those patents and if Intel looses them then AMD’s up next because they are pretty blatant.
 
Intel is going to drag this to appeals. It's one thing to infringe on someone's patents but patent trolling needs to not be a thing any longer. it's stifling competition. This still seems excessive.
 
GiGaBiTe said:
VLSI ceased to exist as a company in 1999 when they were bought by Phillips Semiconductor and rolled into NXP. NXP was spun off from Phillips in 2006.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-...-2-18-billion-after-losing-texas-patent-trial

This paints a picture of what looks like a convoluted patent troll case done via backroom deals and conglomerate shuffling of shell companies and purchased patent portfolios. The original VLSI technology ceased to be a company in 1999, but Phillips and later NXP retained the rights to the name. It looks like they brought the name out of retirement several years ago and assigned the two offending patents Intel supposedly infringed upon to the shell company VLSI Technology. The two patents in question were bought from Sigmatel and Freescale Semiconductor and assigned to VLSI Technology in 2019.

I would say this is less about Intel violating patents and more about some shadowy figure in a mega conglomerate looking to make a big payday. It furthers the notion of it being a patent troll being filed in Texas because the federal court in Texas has historically been very friendly to patent troll companies. Tyler, TX used to be a sleepy town 30 years ago, but now it is home to armies of lawyers.
Click to expand...
A Patent is a Patent and has no value to especially an individual if it can't be sold off. There's almost nothing left to invent that isn't a part of a much larger system. If an individual is expected to bring their innovation to market as one piece of a larger system, it'll be the last invention that person ever makes if they can even pull it off. I invent a new Jet engine blade contour, I'm not effen creating an airplane company to benefit from it. To preserve the intent of the Patent System for individuals, ownership transfer must be a thing.

The term Patent Troll is overused and falsely applied to ownership transfers.
 
Skyblue said:
If the town makes its money from these cases, how can the court claim to be just?
Click to expand...

It isn't, which is why the rules in the courts were changed. East Texas courts have been known for decades to be favorable to patent trolls, which is why patent trolls set up shop there. In the past several years, the rules on such cases have changed, requiring the litigation to be filed in the jurisdiction where the alleged violation took place. This makes it so the plaintiff can't play favorites with which court the case is filed in that may be more favorable to them than the defendant.

Jagger100 said:
A Patent is a Patent and has no value to especially an individual if it can't be sold off. There's almost nothing left to invent that isn't a part of a much larger system. If an individual is expected to bring their innovation to market as one piece of a larger system, it'll be the last invention that person ever makes if they can even pull it off. I invent a new Jet engine blade contour, I'm not effen creating an airplane company to benefit from it. To preserve the intent of the Patent System for individuals, ownership transfer must be a thing.

The term Patent Troll is overused and falsely applied to ownership transfers.
Click to expand...

This is not how the patent system was originally intended to work. The original idea of the patent system is that an inventor could patent a widget of some description that gives them exclusive rights to the widget for a number of years in exchange for making information about said widget public.

It was not intended to be abused by large corporations making shell companies and assigning tens, hundreds or thousands of random patents they buy to use as a weapon to crush competition, which is exactly what was done in this case. It's very clear that the owners of VLSI Technology had no intention of using the patents for anything other than burying competition under a legal quagmire and extracting as much cash as possible. Using a patent as a weapon makes whoever is doing it scum, and only serves to stifle innovation.
 
GiGaBiTe said:
This is not how the patent system was originally intended to work. The original idea of the patent system is that an inventor could patent a widget of some description that gives them exclusive rights to the widget for a number of years in exchange for making information about said widget public.
Click to expand...
And stocks were originally a way for a company to raise some money by selling off a fractional part of the company to someone willing to invest in it in exchange for a fractional piece of the profits said company make. But how the whole stock market has twisted and changed from that original idea is kind of how patents have changed, they really don't "help" anyone except those trying to make money off something.
 
GiGaBiTe said:
VLSI ceased to exist as a company in 1999 when they were bought by Phillips Semiconductor and rolled into NXP. NXP was spun off from Phillips in 2006.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-...-2-18-billion-after-losing-texas-patent-trial

This paints a picture of what looks like a convoluted patent troll case done via backroom deals and conglomerate shuffling of shell companies and purchased patent portfolios. The original VLSI technology ceased to be a company in 1999, but Phillips and later NXP retained the rights to the name. It looks like they brought the name out of retirement several years ago and assigned the two offending patents Intel supposedly infringed upon to the shell company VLSI Technology. The two patents in question were bought from Sigmatel and Freescale Semiconductor and assigned to VLSI Technology in 2019.

I would say this is less about Intel violating patents and more about some shadowy figure in a mega conglomerate looking to make a big payday. It furthers the notion of it being a patent troll being filed in Texas because the federal court in Texas has historically been very friendly to patent troll companies. Tyler, TX used to be a sleepy town 30 years ago, but now it is home to armies of lawyers.
Click to expand...
as soon as i saw waco tx, i figured patent trolling the cause
 
Krenum said:
Bad news for intel. The hits keep coming. On the upside, I think we can all agree that it would be nice to be in the position to accept and pay a 2.2 Billion dollar lawsuit.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/i...22-billion-in-damages-for-patent-infringement

"A federal jury in Waco, Texas, ruled today that Intel must pay $2.18 billion in damages to VLSI, a semiconductor design firm, for violating two of its patents. Damages for one patent violation weigh in at $1.5 billion, while the other totals $675 million. The broader case is still ongoing, though, as VLSI has sued Intel in several states, spanning California, Delaware, and Texas, for damages associated with six other alleged patent violations".
Click to expand...

U.S. Patent Office Rules in Intel's Favor for $2.18 Billion VLSI Patents Case​

Back in December, 2022, the two companies agreed to end their $4 billion patent dispute in Delaware. Yet, in November, 2022, a Texas federal jury ruled that Intel must compensate VLSI close to $949 million for violating its 7,242,552 patent, which covers a technique designed to mitigate issues caused by stress exerted on bond pads.


While it looks like Intel is winning its legal disputes with VLSI, the fight is not over yet.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/u...favor-for-dollar218-billion-vlsi-patents-case
 
GiGaBiTe said:
VLSI ceased to exist as a company in 1999 when they were bought by Phillips Semiconductor and rolled into NXP. NXP was spun off from Phillips in 2006.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-...-2-18-billion-after-losing-texas-patent-trial

This paints a picture of what looks like a convoluted patent troll case done via backroom deals and conglomerate shuffling of shell companies and purchased patent portfolios. The original VLSI technology ceased to be a company in 1999, but Phillips and later NXP retained the rights to the name. It looks like they brought the name out of retirement several years ago and assigned the two offending patents Intel supposedly infringed upon to the shell company VLSI Technology. The two patents in question were bought from Sigmatel and Freescale Semiconductor and assigned to VLSI Technology in 2019.

I would say this is less about Intel violating patents and more about some shadowy figure in a mega conglomerate looking to make a big payday. It furthers the notion of it being a patent troll being filed in Texas because the federal court in Texas has historically been very friendly to patent troll companies. Tyler, TX used to be a sleepy town 30 years ago, but now it is home to armies of lawyers.
Click to expand...
I’ll gladly except the judgement on their behalf then. :)
 
N4CR said:
Wonder if they'll drag the payment out like they did with AMD..
Click to expand...
Intel ended up being found not guilty in that one.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/26/int...n-antitrust-fine-overturned-by-eu-court-.html
Turns out there is no actual law against providing bulk discounts, the fact the bulk orders were basically set at or very near market cap is irrelevant.

But it's Fortress and Texas, of course, they won, it was a guaranteed victory, Intel will challenge it and get out of it with a significantly reduced payment.

The patent they "violated" is for using high voltage when under load, and using a lower voltage when at a reduced load... Yea you can apparently patent that.
The other "patent" they violated is for running at a higher clock speed when performance gains are needed and using a lower one when they are not.

Yeah, variable clock speeds and variable voltages...
Not the methods for determining how or when these voltage changes or clock speed changes are implemented, but the act of implementing them at all.

If Intel pays they go for everybody else second.
 
Skyblue said:
If the town makes its money from these cases, how can the court claim to be just?
Click to expand...

I'm not defending the decisions of the court, but the idea of a specialized court for patent cases isn't unreasonable, because patent cases have a lot of technical stuff going on, and it's better for the parties if the judge who hears the case is well versed in patent cases.

With venue shopping available, of course plantiffs are going to file in the jurisdiction where they can get judges experienced in patent cases. Especially if they get favorable results. Now that venue shopping is less available, there will still likely be specialization, but it will be a couple of judges in each distict, rather than all centralized in east texas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top