Patent Infringement Action Against nVidia

[KeithTalent]

Here is the article:

Yahoo Article

I was wondering about the technologies referenced here:

The five patents at issue in the lawsuit are U.S. patent No. 5,710,906, U.S. patent No. 5,813,036, U.S. patent No. 6,405,291, all entitled "Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses," U.S. patent No. 5,944,807 and U.S. patent No. 6,098,141, both entitled "Compact ISA-Bus Interface." The complaint alleges that nVidia infringes the patents by making, selling, and offering for sale products based on and incorporating Predictive Snooping technology and the Low Pin Count Interface Specification in various of its products and inducing and contributing to the infringement of the patents by others.

Does anyone know what these techs do and how relevant they are to the card design? I am hoping one of you video gurus can enlighten me.

I have friends who hold stock in both ATI and nVidia and we were just discussing what the implications of this may be.

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

[pkme2]

I really don't know too much about this lawsuit, but I would love to be picked for jury duty. My feeling right now is that Nvidia has bitten off more than it can chew. A very expensive mistake, like another David and Goliath battle. OPTi's settlement will be a biggy. I think the Low Pin Count Interface Specification is where the infrigement is centered. I could be wrong, but it seems logical.

 

[KeithTalent]

Well we will certainly have to wait and see. I always find these things fascinating, and you are probably right about the big settlement, particularly if nVidia thinks they are going to lose, which it appears they probably will.

This is why I am wondering about the technology because I want to know if nVidia can just stop using it, or if they will need to pay royalties forever.

 

[BenSkywalker]

If push comes to shove, nVidia will just buy the company. Their market cap is miniscule- nV would have no trouble purchasing the company outright for a fraction of last quarters profits.

As far as the technology, I'd have to go over the patents to see what is contested, but frequently these issues come down to being entirely obvious(applying a texture to a polygon has been patented in the past as an example).

 

[5150Joker]

I guess nVidia better start saving up the money it's making from those 4:1 sales of it's 7900 series and get ready to do a pay out to these guys.

 

[Gstanfor]

nVIDIA will just buy OPTi outright IMHO. I very much doubt OPTi would succeed with the last to alleged infringments anyhow since they relate to the prehistoric ISA bus, a bus that to my knowledge nVIDIA has never utilised...

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
If push comes to shove, nVidia will just buy the company. Their market cap is miniscule- nV would have no trouble purchasing the company outright for a fraction of last quarters profits.

As far as the technology, I'd have to go over the patents to see what is contested, but frequently these issues come down to being entirely obvious(applying a texture to a polygon has been patented in the past as an example).

:laugh:

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
nVIDIA will just buy OPTi outright IMHO. I very much doubt OPTi would succeed with the last to alleged infringments anyhow since they relate to the prehistoric ISA bus, a bus that to my knowledge nVIDIA has never utilised...

NV1 (Diamond Edge 3D) was ISA compatible but as far as I know only appeared in PCI form.

 

[Gstanfor]

In other words, ISA was never actually utilised. Is there a "use it or lose it" condition attached to patents? (especially old ones) If there isn't, there ought to be.

 

[BFG10K]

PCI may have some of the ISA protocol rolled into it, much like AGP has some of the PCI protocol rolled into it (e.g. write combining).

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
In other words, ISA was never actually utilised. Is there a "use it or lose it" condition attached to patents? (especially old ones) If there isn't, there ought to be.

Unfortunately no. I think copyright is a use it or lose it but patents aren't. I know of a local milk company (pretty large) who regularly puts out a batch of icecream that it no longer sells just to keep the copyright on that brand.

 

[Gstanfor]

They'd have to sue everyone who makes IDE drives and controllers then since IDE is almost literally the AT bus routed over a cable. I think IBM, not OPTi ultimately owns the AT bus. They'd also have to go after cpu manufacturers for using write combining, not just chipset vendors.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
I guess nVidia better start saving up the money it's making from those 4:1 sales of it's 7900 series and get ready to do a pay out to these guys.

While the company that you run ads for tries fights a class action suit on securities fraud and another on false advertising. They can get ready for a possible patent violation on unified shaders
http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/news.html?d=84747
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28037
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/17/1353223

Big companies face this kind of crap all the time. ATI, NVIDIA, Microsoft, AMD, Intel, blah blah.

 

[KeithTalent]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/17/1353223[/L]

Big companies face this kind of crap all the time. ATI, NVIDIA, Microsoft, AMD, Intel, blah blah.

Completely agree, with differing levels of severity and validity of course, which is why I was asking about the technology involved.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent

Originally posted by: Wreckage
.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/17/1353223[/L]

Big companies face this kind of crap all the time. ATI, NVIDIA, Microsoft, AMD, Intel, blah blah.

Completely agree, with differing levels of severity and validity of course, which is why I was asking about the technology involved.

The problem with a lot of these cases is the vague descriptions used in a patent. Not too mention that "prior art" or work that came out before the patent was even filed. I think more information is needed to comment on the technology involved and if it ever goes to trial you may find out more in depth information.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
In other words, ISA was never actually utilised. Is there a "use it or lose it" condition attached to patents? (especially old ones) If there isn't, there ought to be.

Unfortunately no. I think copyright is a use it or lose it but patents aren't. I know of a local milk company (pretty large) who regularly puts out a batch of icecream that it no longer sells just to keep the copyright on that brand.

Actually, brand names are trademarks, not copyrights. Only original works (books, music, etc...) are copyright-able, and every copyright expires after a statutory period (the life of the author plus 70 years I believe?). After expiration, the material passes into the public domain. All patents expire 20 years after the date they were filed for - this helps keep prices down for consumers and innovation by inventors up.

 

[Gstanfor]

Thats what I thought. I'd argue that IT patents should expire after 5 years, not 20.