I think MAUs are multiply-accumulate units.
So, like DSPs have had forever?
Yep, nothing novel about it
SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
81–90 of 186 posts
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
What chance does our legal system have of gauging the validity of these patents when we can't even get a forum of technical people, with no horse in the race, to agree on what these things mean?
In a reasonable world, benefit of the doubt shouldn't be given to the patent holder when there is genuine confusion. It should be incumbent upon the filer to describe their invention in a way that is clear to experts in that relevant field. Sadly I suspect the world we live in isn't so reasonable.
The patent holder didn't receive their patent by accident. It was reviewed by an examiner in the patent office. Patent examiners are skilled technical researchers who are trained to comprehend the matter they are examining. Once a patent has been granted, indeed, there is benefit of the doubt that the patent is valid. However - when it comes to whether the patent applies to a given invention, that's a matter of debate in a courtroom.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read that line as poking fun of the fact that RAM is not capitalized because the lawyers that wrote this think "ram" is a word, not an acronym
Eh, shrug . I don't think so. In any case, the fact that SparkFun doesn't even do semiconductor design makes this whole lawsuit even more ridiculous. They put chips onto boards, they don't design ALUs with special configurable control bits!
It actually doesn't matter if SparkFun designs chips. They do buy them, and re-sell them in devices. Patent law continues to apply to all downstream implementations of a product, until the claim is "exhausted" by a license. So, if the maker of the SoC doesn't have a license from this troll, then the troll is free to sue all of their customers, and in turn their customers, all the way down until someone pays up.
It's a bit absurd to imagine, but if someone has a patent on a CPU design, which is then used in a radio, which is installed in a car, which is driven by a taxi driver, then the patent holder can in principle sue the taxi driver for using their radio without licensing the patent.
In practice, patent trolls will figure out who they can sue who is big enough to extract $$, but not so big as to run the risk of them fighting back and invalidating the patent.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#84I wonder if it's possible to make some sort of patent troll insurance company. Basically a company that attempts to collect as many patents as possible to weaponize against trolls and then provides legal protection to clients from trolls. The clients can share their patents with the insurance company too to help them become more powerful. Then when sued by a troll the insurance company goes scorched earth to destroy…
There's a ton of asymmetry that makes this not work. One, patent trolls are "non-practicing entities". They don't build anything, or do anything other than sue people, so you can t sue them for infringement of patents. Two they shard their portfolio into very small chunks, often one patent per company. If you knock down one patent, you just take out that one patent. Three, they are usually run by lawyers, so their cost to attack is just their time, whereas you'll have to hire an attorney at market rate to respond. Four, if things get hairy, they can almost always just dismiss the case, and then you lose any claim you have against them, because they're not suing you any more. It's tricky to get counterclaims set up so you can continue grinding them down after they try to dismiss - and it will cost you money. And, at the end of the day, you'll at best invalidate their one patent.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#85I wonder if one could make trolling patent trolls self-sustaining. For example, let’s say you get hit with a demand letter. I review it and agree to finance your case. Using my resources, I prepare to invalidate the troll’s patents unless they settle for some amount less than their expected lifetime value from said patents. This gets split between you and me (after litigation costs), with maybe some of my share reser…
In that case, the troll can almost always just drop the suit and then you have no claim against them.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#86Why not just abolish patents? Who or what would oppose this?
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#87(Note that none of the following is legal advice.) One tip on reading patent - ignore most of the diagrams and description, and go straight to the claims. The claims are the only valid part of the patent. In this case, all the static/dynamic RAM, signals, memory cache, and malloc stuffs are irrelevant and misdirection. This patent has only 1 claim [1]. The claim has a series of elements making a number of conditions…
Just reread the claim after went home. Some fixes below.
All processors are the same. Each processor has the following required components: multiplier, arithmetic unit, arithmetic logic unit, and a bit manipulation unit. Each internal component has input/output ports which connect to the input/output ports of the processor. The ALU and bit components can run concurrently to the other components.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#88Me: software engr, retired; also patent agent who worked in Google Patent Litigation. A rookie mistake is reading the TEXT of a patent. A pro looks only at the claims. The text is only there to "support" the claims, which boils down to using the same words. Cynical, I know. Claims unfortunately look like gibberish if you're unschooled, but "construing" them is an early step in a trial, and often if you get a bad clai…
> I'll read those claims a little later this evening.
I'll save everyone the trouble and tell you without reading them: they're bullshit and so are most software/computer patents. We really need to come together as an industry and fight this crap. Huge props to SparkFun for taking on these bottom feeders.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#89I wonder if it's possible to make some sort of patent troll insurance company. Basically a company that attempts to collect as many patents as possible to weaponize against trolls and then provides legal protection to clients from trolls. The clients can share their patents with the insurance company too to help them become more powerful. Then when sued by a troll the insurance company goes scorched earth to destroy…
>Basically a company that attempts to collect as many patents as possible to weaponize
You've more or less explained IBM. You cant come at IBM because their patent portfolio is so vast, they you're bound to be doing something that infringes on some patent they have.
When I working there you wouldn't get promoted from being an IC to a manager unless you had at least 10 patents to your name during your tenure there.
Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll
#90OK - so I vaguely skipped through the patent looking for claims - mostly it's a description of some guys possibly novel media processor architecture, remember the description is not the patent, the claims are. I could only find a short claims section at the end (1.5 pages out of 56). This doesn't read like most patents which tend to be lower on the details, and longer on the claims, I suspect that this was either wri…
nVidia and Sony actually cited this patent I'd think you'd need to look further back. I'd guess Cray? This seems like something they would have patented very early on with the Cray1.