GloFo patent suit against TSMC threatens Nvidia sales ban - HEXUS NEWS

[JPB]

GloFo patent suit against TSMC threatens Nvidia sales ban

Globalfoundries has filed a lawsuit against TSMC for patent infringements. The patent suit has been filed in the US and Germany and alleges that TSMC has infringed upon GF's patents for semiconductor manufacturing technology.

As well as seeking damages, GF is asking the courts to prevent semiconductors made by TSMC being imported into the US and Germany. This means that products made using TSMC produced chips could be barred from sale in the two countries. Thus, companies such as Apple, Google, Qualcomm, Cisco Systems, Nvidia, Broadcom, Xilinx, Lenovo and Motorola have their products in the firing line, reports the New York Times.

In its press release GF says that while other semiconductor manufacturers have shifted to Asia it has continued to invest in American and European business, spending over $15 billion in the US and $6 billion in Europe over the last decade. "These lawsuits are aimed at protecting those investments and the US and European-based innovation that powers them," said Gregg Bartlett, SVP, engineering and technology at GF. "For years, while we have been devoting billions of dollars to domestic research and development, TSMC has been unlawfully reaping the benefits of our investments. This action is critical to halt Taiwan Semiconductor's unlawful use of our vital assets and to safeguard the American and European manufacturing base."

Analysts reckon that GF might have been "emboldened by Trump administration comments about the trade war with China,"says the NYT, and perhaps GF was even given the green light for this suit by the State Department. Though it is obvious there could be a big upside in this lawsuit for GF ("significant damages"), it might anger some of its customers.

TSMC responds

Earlier today TSMC released an official response to the news of the lawsuit. It is currently reviewing the complaints but in the meantime asserts it is a leading innovator with its own portfolio of >37,000 semiconductor patents. It will "vigorously defend its proprietary technology in response to Globalfoundries complaints," it summarises. (Thanks for this timely update to the anonymous HEXUS news tipster).

 

[NostaSeronx]

GlobalFoundries has accused TSMC with patent infringement and unfair competitive practices. Not just patent infringement, btw.

"If the accused imports are determined to infringe a valid and enforceable U.S. patent, copyright, registered trademark, or mask work, the USITC may issue orders excluding the products from entry into the United States and/or directing the violating parties to cease and desist from certain actions. Where such infringement is shown, injury need not be shown to establish a violation of section 337. In cases involving other unfair methods of competition or unfair acts, if the USITC finds that the importation of the accused articles substantially injures or threatens to substantially injure an industry, prevents the establishment of such an industry, or restrains or monopolizes trade and commerce in the United States, it may also issue exclusion and/or cease and desist orders." -Section 337, Tariff Act of 1930, Investigations of Unfair Practices in Import Trade

Samsung, UMC, and SMIC are safe via their own slices of IBM-to-them version of the Common Platform Alliance perpetual license.

 

[NTMBK]

Isn't there already a thread about this in CPUs?

 

[NostaSeronx]

Isn't there already a thread about this in CPUs?

It is home to another thread topic. The one you are looking for is in OT.

->The Glofo vs. the world lawsuit thread // OT Discussion Club
-> GloFo patent suit against TSMC threatens Nvidia sales ban - HEXUS NEWS // Graphics Cards

 

[ondma]

GlobalFoundries has accused TSMC with patent infringement and unfair competitive practices. Not just patent infringement, btw.

"If the accused imports are determined to infringe a valid and enforceable U.S. patent, copyright, registered trademark, or mask work, the USITC may issue orders excluding the products from entry into the United States and/or directing the violating parties to cease and desist from certain actions. Where such infringement is shown, injury need not be shown to establish a violation of section 337. In cases involving other unfair methods of competition or unfair acts, if the USITC finds that the importation of the accused articles substantially injures or threatens to substantially injure an industry, prevents the establishment of such an industry, or restrains or monopolizes trade and commerce in the United States, it may also issue exclusion and/or cease and desist orders." -Section 337, Tariff Act of 1930, Investigations of Unfair Practices in Import Trade

Samsung, UMC, and SMIC are safe via their own slices of IBM-to-them version of the Common Platform Alliance perpetual license.

Yea, it is unfair. TSMC makes better products.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Yea, it is unfair. TSMC makes better products.

Anything that is gate-last at GlobalFoundries utterly blows. However, Globalfoundries when they aren't focusing on gate-last, make good on gate-first potential.

28BLK -> 22FDX -> 12FDX, so far so good. If they make the same leap for 7FDX. As long as the CPP is less than ~66-nm, FDSOI gets higher drive current than FinFETs. Too bad they have sandbagged their roadmap.

 

[NTMBK]

Anything that is gate-last at GlobalFoundries utterly blows. However, Globalfoundries when they aren't focusing on gate-last, make good on gate-first potential.

28BLK -> 22FDX -> 12FDX, so far so good. If they make the same leap for 7FDX. As long as the CPP is less than ~66-nm, FDSOI gets higher drive current than FinFETs. Too bad they have sandbagged their roadmap.

The FDSOI processes are aimed at entirely different markets from TSMC's FinFET processes.

 

[NostaSeronx]

The FDSOI processes are aimed at entirely different markets from TSMC's FinFET processes.

The FDSOI processes are aimed at all markets, not one-two-three-four but all markets.

The 22FDX-UHP application-optimized process was aimed at 14LPP and 16FF. However, there was a booster that allowed 8T to go faster than 12T. Which killed UHP and they fully integrated Ultra High Performance into base. Extending the value of the base version, UHP-integrated.

12T std cells approximately 9T 28nm std cells in density
8T std cells approximately 2x more dense than 9T 28nm std cells.
So, there was a definite performance-power-area value in integrating UHP capability into base.

GlobalFoundries:
22FDX/12FDX (Slow R&D/Slow Ramp/Some of Capex) => Sandbag so as not to have two nodes competing (However, be sure to reference 22FDX/12FDX having same or higher performance)
12LP/7LP (Fast R&D/Fast Ramp/Most of Capex) => Escalation of commitment (This only has losses in its future, lets pivot and make 22FDX/12FDX our leading products. As it is gaining momentum at the lowest of logic capex)

Samsung 28FDS/18FDS => Best Cost
GlobalFoundries 22FDX/12FDX => Overall best Cost/Performance/Power (Cost over Performance, and Performance over Power; for the cost it performs better than its power consumption)

However, do to GlobalFoundries relationship with IBM. They are sitting on some big performance/power boosts for 22FDX/12FDX. Increase initial costs(mostly, only visible to GloFo) to absolutely beat FinFETs is an option. TSMC can't infringe on something they never wanted.