Just when I thought $750K per LTE patent was crazy, HTC pays $1.28M per S3 patent

[theeedude]

Since HTC uses primarily Qualcomm, which has it's own Adreno graphics, and VIA gets to hold on to the S3 chip business, I can only assume HTC bought S3 just for the patents. Either that or it's a case of HTC chairwoman using HTC shareholder's money to buy out a business in which she has partial ownership.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/06/htc-acquires-s3-graphics-for-patent-portfolio-dares-you-to-sue/
Either way, I think patents are the next bubble.

 

[WelshBloke]

Well yeah its for the patents, Apple have already been found to be infringing on two of them i think.

It is retarded that firms feel compelled to spend money on these things rather than r&d.

 

[Bateluer]

Either way, I think patents are the next bubble.

God, I hope so.

The companies that litigate because they can't make a product people want are like Gonorrhea leakage.

 

[BenSkywalker]

This could be the best 'value' of any of the patents being bought and sold currently.

S3 owns the IP for DXTC which MS needs for a great deal of Windows uses and every XBox(DirectX breaks without it, WMP fails for certain functions and even Aero can be impacted). It may well end up that that $5 per Android device fee vanishes, or HTC may offer MS the same licensing option in reverse, $5 for every copy of Windows and every XBox sold- I'm thinking HTC would come out a bit ahead in that one.

or it's a case of HTC chairwoman using HTC shareholder's money to buy out a business in which she has partial ownership.

If anything, I see the pressure going the other way. I can't imagine that AMD or nVidia wouldn't have at least matched that offer, don't underestimate the power of the old graphics IP and their importance in the modern landscape.

 

[Phynaz]

Since HTC uses primarily Qualcomm, which has it's own Adreno graphics, and VIA gets to hold on to the S3 chip business, I can only assume HTC bought S3 just for the patents. Either that or it's a case of HTC chairwoman using HTC shareholder's money to buy out a business in which she has partial ownership.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/06/htc-acquires-s3-graphics-for-patent-portfolio-dares-you-to-sue/
Either way, I think patents are the next bubble.

No money was "spent". HTC and Via are controlled by the same people / investors.

The other owner of S3 besides via was an investment company owned the CEO / Chairperson of Via / HTC.

 

[Mopetar]

S3 owns the IP for DXTC which MS needs for a great deal of Windows uses and every XBox(DirectX breaks without it, WMP fails for certain functions and even Aero can be impacted). It may well end up that that $5 per Android device fee vanishes, or HTC may offer MS the same licensing option in reverse, $5 for every copy of Windows and every XBox sold- I'm thinking HTC would come out a bit ahead in that one.

Or it fails for the same reason the recently acquired Nortel patents won't be used to sue anyone: the companies in question already have long-term licensing arrangements in place.

If these patents were vital to several of Microsoft's core products, they would have a license. Otherwise they would have been infringing for years and open to a lawsuit. Just like the current third party phone manufacturers should already have licenses for the Nortel patents they need, otherwise the slew of 4G phones that have been released would just open them up to all kinds of lawsuits.

 

[gsaldivar]

Good for HTC.

 

[theeedude]

No money was "spent". HTC and Via are controlled by the same people / investors.

The other owner of S3 besides via was an investment company owned the CEO / Chairperson of Via / HTC.

HTC is a publicly traded company. This is a CEO of a publicly traded company using company's money to buy out another company she owns.

 

[tonygeor]

non-tangible assets are apparently big business

 

[BenSkywalker]

Or it fails for the same reason the recently acquired Nortel patents won't be used to sue anyone: the companies in question already have long-term licensing arrangements in place.

If it is a cross licensing agreement then HTC would now own those rights, which would negate the $5 charge per handset they are currently paying. If IP changes hands MS can't change the conditions of the licensing agreement unless they want to sever it, which could end up costing them far more.

 

[Mopetar]

Why would S3 be in a cross licensing arrangement with Microsoft. S3 makes graphics cards, chipsets, and controllers. It's unlikely that Microsoft has anything that they would want, or anything that would constitute an equal value. Given that VIA still has a perpetual license to the patents in question, Microsoft can continue to buy any necessary components from VIA.

Either this is some sketchy crap as could be inferred from Phynaz's earlier post or HTC may be interested in designing their own SoCs and have decided to buy up some patents to use in their designs or as protection from other chip makers.

 

[shortylickens]

God, I hope so.

The companies that litigate because they can't make a product people want are like Gonorrhea leakage.

^
This

 

[A5]

Why would S3 be in a cross licensing arrangement with Microsoft. S3 makes graphics cards, chipsets, and controllers. It's unlikely that Microsoft has anything that they would want, or anything that would constitute an equal value. Given that VIA still has a perpetual license to the patents in question, Microsoft can continue to buy any necessary components from VIA.

Either this is some sketchy crap as could be inferred from Phynaz's earlier post or HTC may be interested in designing their own SoCs and have decided to buy up some patents to use in their designs or as protection from other chip makers.

You must have missed the post above about DXTC. It's a pretty fundamental part of DirectX and S3 owns a few patents that cover the basic technology that is uses.

 

[Mopetar]

Yes, that means S3 has something that Microsoft wants, but what does Microsoft have that S3 wants?

That means Microsoft most definitely pays license fees to S3, but that S3 doesn't pay to license anything from Microsoft. It wouldn't make much financial sense for them to cut into such a large revenue stream by cross licensing patents and reducing the license fee.

 

[A5]

Yes, that means S3 has something that Microsoft wants, but what does Microsoft have that S3 wants?

That means Microsoft most definitely pays license fees to S3, but that S3 doesn't pay to license anything from Microsoft. It wouldn't make much financial sense for them to cut into such a large revenue stream by cross licensing patents and reducing the license fee.

Microsoft has such a big portfolio that they almost certainly have a patent on something that S3 would need - I would guess that they have patents on other parts of DirectX that S3 would need to build a DX-compatible graphics chip, but I don't know that for sure.

 

[Mopetar]

This story indicates that the deal probably has little or nothing to do with Microsoft. It appears as though it's about HTC's suit with Apple.

 

[Phynaz]

This story indicates that the deal probably has little or nothing to do with Microsoft. It appears as though it's about HTC's suit with Apple.

Nice, didn't think about that angle.

 

[WelshBloke]

Nice, didn't think about that angle.

Second post dude, second post.

 

[Phynaz]

Second post dude, second post.

Doh!