Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case

#141

Post by simonh » Thu, Oct 15, 2015, 3:16 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #140

simonh wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take your point, but if I were to pick any of those valuations as being adrift from reality it wouldn't be those for P.A. Semi or Intrinsity.

As you said: P.A. Semi and Intrinsity are "the foundation of Apple's processor engineering capabilities." That might have been their market value , but I think it's fair to say that the value to Apple was far greater ( i.e. Apple got a huge purchaser's surplus in the deal).

Yup, no argument there. They've converted that talent into a significant advantage for their platforms.

Re: Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case

#142

Post by shasta » Thu, Oct 15, 2015, 3:46 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #129

shasta wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe this is worth a patent, or maybe not. Maybe start with another question. What do you think the odds are that there was any kind of causal chain from the invention of this technique by the patent holder to Apple's use of the technique?

An early paper by the inventor on the technique is cited over 300+ in Google Scholar, including by Hennessy & Patterson.

Good to know. Maybe the patented is warranted. Can you also argue that the $862 million is appropriate?

Re: Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case

#143

Post by DannyBee » Mon, Oct 19, 2015, 8:15 PM UTC

mentat wrote: post #111

DannyBee wrote: post #34

In general, I welcome the day when universities get what is coming to them for this kind of stuff (see also: Marvell vs CMU for 300+ million, reduced from 1.5 billion on appeal, etc). In particular, given how much industry funds them, collaborates with their professors, etc, what is going on now is a remarkably stupid approach mostly driven by tech transfer offices that want to prove their value. Which will be "zero"…

You think they're funding researchers at market rates?

Do you think the universities would really be getting anywhere without the help of the industries they are now pissing on?

Take away the faculty awards, industry collaborations, donated labs, donated computing time, hiring of interns, etc.

Re: Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case

#144

Post by skaevola » Tue, Oct 20, 2015, 5:32 PM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #101

skaevola wrote: post #84

I'm curious how the university could discover that Apple was using its patent. The internal characteristics of the processor must be secret, right? Do they examine die photos and reconstruct the gate netlist?

[IANAL] There's a discovery process for civil cases.

So the university goes through this process with all semiconductor companies that are developing processors, just to be sure that they're not infringing?

Re: Apple facing huge chip patent bill after losing case

#145

Post by werber » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 11:56 PM UTC

msbarnett wrote: post #43

monochromatic wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Article says it was UW in both cases. edit: disregard, I don't read good

UW holds the patent. UW sued Intel. This lawsuit was settled. UW then sued Apple. A different company. Why would the fact that the suit with Intel was settled impact their ability to sue Apple? What's the source of confusion here?

Oh duh. whoops