Slashdot Mirror
Transmeta Sues Intel for Patent Infringement
Cr0w T. Trollbot writes "Today Transmeta filed suit against Intel for patent infringement. From the article: 'The suit [...] alleges that Intel infringed upon ten of Transmeta's patents. The patents cover computer architecture and power efficiency technologies.' Transmeta offered a low-power x86 processor until last year which used Transmeta's vaunted 'code morphing' software."
When the chips are down, ( no pun intended ) and your business model is going up in a fireball.. sue someone!
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I thought that they filed bankruptcy or something.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Is anyone else getting a little sick of these patent infringment stories? Its now common knowledge that you can't build anything in the United States without some IP leech suing you, so is this really even a big deal anymore? We all know the eventual result of this: either more products will be invented in other countries or the only things that will be made in the U.S. anymore will be by companies that have a large legal budget, which I'm sure Intel does. Stories like this will become small insignificant news.
This is a last ditch effort by TransMeta. They've been losing money for many fiscal quarters now and I guess SCO-like tactics are all that's left.
Transmeta has alleged this before, as have other companies. It's nearly unavoidable in the technology business that your invention will have something in common with theirs. It all comes down to a lot highly paid patent lawyers and engineers showing diagrams in court and vouching for when they designed what, if it even makes it into court.
Most likely outcome: settlement involving a small amount of money and a cross-licensing agreement. No judge in their right mind would grant an injunction against shipping the majority of the world's processors, no matter what the infringement.
FTA: "The complaint charges that Intel has infringed and is infringing Transmeta's patents by making and selling a variety of microprocessor products, including at least Intel's Pentium III, Pentium 4, Pentium M, Core and Core 2 product lines."
They sure are going back a long ways...
FTA: "Last year, Transmeta laid off 67 employees in a restructuring plan aimed to focus more heavily on IP and the phase out its less profitable processors."
So they went out of the business of actually making anything (presumably because their products were not competitive in the market place), so NOW they turn to their IP to make any money. I really don't know if they've got a valid case or not, but they certainly seem to be trolling.
"including at least Intel's Pentium III, Pentium 4, Pentium M, Core and Core 2 product lines."
;)
So, when was Pentium 3?
They waited until they were no longer in the market to sue so they cant be counter sued as effectively. Surely they must have done something they could be sued for, go get them anyway. This just smells funny. If your IP is so great why couldn't they make salable product out of it?
I think these IP lawsuits work like games...the one crying cheater loudest is probably the guilty one
Transmeta offered a low-power x86 processor until last year which used Transmeta's vaunted 'code morphing' software.
Quick, someone use this "code morphing" software on the mona lisa so we can find the Holy Grail!
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
It seems like everyone so far is poo-pooing the lawsuit.
Has anyone considered that it might actually be possible that Transmeta really does have valid patents, and Intel really might be infringing them?
it is posiable but.. if they are refrencing the P3 which was out along time ago.. and well not any more.. then they didn't bother to protect their patent.. now if it is a diffrent set for the Core cpu's then fine but don't bring up stuff that they didn't bother with.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
As a developer when i see a company do this ... I seriously quetion if I can refuse to participate in my companies work in pursuing patents for my work ... b/c if the company was to ever collapse (not being a business person) I could be crippling my own future at other employers ... imagine switching jobs and being your new company being sued by a "defunct" company you used to work for ...
It's too clever a saying for me to have been the first to have thought of it, so I probably just heard it before.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Oh You POS
Transmeta has a rather extensive patent portfolio, with many new ones granted this year.
In addition, they've got a fair number of engineers working at both Sony and Microsoft, and an Efficeon CPU (with AMD branding) is the only certified processor for the FlexGo program.
The history is that Transmeta has brought out some innovative low-power CPUs, but never seemed to gain any market traction at all.
Yes, I think this case might just well have real merit.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
If Transmeta scores a win against Intel, then maybe that could lead to licensing agreements with others that may be afraid that they would also lose in litigation. In the meantime, this is one time where AMD may be thankful that they don't have the largest marketshare and the deepest pockets in the CPU industry.
Oh, come on. Next you'll be suggesting that Intel's patent violations might have had something to do with Transmeta's financial problems, as if patents were actually supposed to protect the little guy from having his inventions stolen by better funded competitors. You obviously need to be reminded of proper Slashdot grouptink. Remember: all patents are evil, and only patent trolls try to enforce them.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
While Transmeta did form in 1997, it wasn't until 1999 (when the P3 was already a reality) that they said anything at all and it wasn't until 2000 that they announced anything.
To me it just looks like pure greed, same as BeOS and MS. Come up with an idea, fail to think idea all the way through, fail at the market, blame someone else, sue them.
Transmeta: Hey, want to license this power management technology?
Intel: Maybe, how does it work?
TM: Like this.
Intel: Oh, we've already got something like that...
TM: Umm... but we patented it ages ago.
Intel: Fine. Sue us.
Without knowing the specifics of the patent, I can't judge one way or another.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
From the article:
;-)
"Last year, Transmeta laid off 67 employees in a restructuring plan aimed to focus more heavily on IP and the phase out its less profitable processors." (emphasis added)
Patent portfolio operation?!? Whatever do you mean??
> Transmeta has a rather extensive patent portfolio, with many new ones granted this year.
Transmeta had several patents issued in 2006, but I don't see any *filed* this year.
I see four filed in 2005, of which one has been issued.
I like that version of the saying better than the one I heard before.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
Intel should just purchase Transmeta outright, between their engineering crew and patents it would be a smart move.
:)
Deffo would make more sense to me than the rumored purchase of nVidia.
You're right, that's the one I've heard before. Unless I've also heard the "sue" version before... But I know I've heard the teach joke. It some respects it's true for all teachers, but it doesn't mean they couldn't ever "do" previous to their teaching career.
Oh You POS
new business plan:
1) form small company of engineers and scientists with good ideas but no idea how to implement them yet
2) wait for big companies with the resources to actually implement some form of the patented ideas to do so
3) sue, sue, sue
4) profit
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
like those who can't do ... teach
I believe that was originally by Mark Twain.
Since this is a story about my rights online, I have nothing to worry about.
They implemented those ideas first... Sure its kind of silly to go after Pentium III.. But for the 2 new CPU's its not a bad idea at all. Oh and Transmeta is but dying out, only changing. Drill deeper before drawing such conclusions. Ya intel-lovers :P
Oh, come on. Next you'll be suggesting that Intel's patent violations might have had something to do with Transmeta's financial problems, as if patents were actually supposed to protect the little guy from having his inventions stolen by better funded competitors.
It's very important to remember that "patent infringement" and "theft of ideas" (even ignoring the abuse of the word 'theft') are *NOT* synonymous because of the patent systems ridiculous assumption that two entities cannot come up with the same idea independently.
You forgot one at the end ... don't remember where I got it. Maybe a Dilbert book somewhere along the line.
Anyway, here's the whole thing:
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, manage.
// Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
// IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
Nope.
Woody Allen.
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.
Those who can't teach, teach gym.
It's here: http://malfy.org/
Those who can't even teach gym, administrate.
No, George Bernard Shaw.
And it's a parody of Aristotle: "Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach."
Yeah, that saying is just a little bit older than Woody Allen, and while that particular version may be attributable to him, I highly doubt he was the first to add a third line.
I've got nothing against being snide, just make sure you know what you're talking about first.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
This reminds me of SCO's tactics: "We have run out of business ideas, we cant seem to be able to make any money, we are headed straight for bankruptcy. Lets sue somebody big."
And then later: "Oh wait we shouldn't have. Bankruptcy would have been so much better than the mess we are in now"
Litigation as a business strategy isn't a good idea. You could get lucky like NTP in NTP Vs. RIMM. However the odds are not very good.
I am pretty sure that Transmeta approached Intel and asked them to take out licenses on said patents and Intel took a look and said "No Thanks". Now Transmeta is suing Intel. Sour grapes. Its a good thing Linus doesn't work for them anymore.
They bought the HP research team that did the Dynamo project. They hired them all. ...still, I'm not surprised to see them suing Intel, as Intel's Netburst architecture has plenty of overlap with the principles of Dynamo and Crusoe.
...., it leads to far to much confusion between copyright, trademarks and patents. Which are only similar in that they are designed to protect and grant rights over, intangible ideas. Personally I think that this confusion is the very reason businesses use the term "Intellectual Property" so much. Im sure they would love to be able to copyright things which are currently under the patent system (this is why software patents are bad, as software is already copyrighted), and enjoy that near century of government mandated monopoly.
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
Literally and figuratively. My Sharp Actius MM10 might have gotten just slightly hotter than my Powerbook -- hard to tell, because it was dead for months before I got the Mac.
It might've been even cooler if it had been possible to bypass their "code morphing software" and natively compile VLIW code. As it is, this little sub-notebook was effectively an x86 PDA. It was insanely small -- 10" screen, about a half inch thick (the whole notebook, not just the screen). It could open completely flat -- unfold until it was a flat board of monitor, keyboard, and mouse. With the builtin battery, it lasted about 3 hours, which is respectable compared to my Powerbook, but with a much smaller battery. With a bigger battery, it easily lasted 9 hours.
It had 256 megs of RAM, I think -- or maybe only 128? -- and a 1 ghz processor that felt like it was 500 mhz. But the battery life and the physical coolness of it -- the thing was passively cooled! -- more than made up for it when used as a work machine (mostly a web browser and an ssh terminal). My new Powerbook is just short of being able to play high def, and this thing couldn't even play DVDs. My Powerbook has an 80 gig or so hard drive, this thing had a 15 gig, and was fragile as hell. But there are two things I desperately miss from it:
1.) x86 arch. There's a 2D Windows MMO that might've played reasonably well on it, but I haven't yet succeeded in making work on my Powerbook. If I did make it work, the x86 emulation would probably kill battery life and make it hot.
2.) insomnia. I've tried a program for my Powerbook called "InsomniaX", which tells OS X not to go to sleep when the lid is closed. With the Sharp, I could put it in my backpack, put headphones on, and listen to random music all the way home -- no need to buy an iPod, and as it used an iPod hard drive anyway, I figured it was reasonably safe from being jostled.
The Powerbook, probably sensing the motion as I walk, kills the music randomly and quite often. If that's indeed the case, I can't really complain, as the motion sensor has saved my ass more than once. Drop the Sharp and lose data, or possibly the disk. Drop the Powerbook and I just get a dent. Still, I miss being able to do that, especially considering how much more space I have now. I shouldn't have to buy an iPod -- everywhere I walk, I carry my laptop in a backpack.
But even if I were to compensate for that -- say, preload a half hour of music to RAM just before I leave, or kill the motion sensor somehow (probably a Bad Thing) -- I'd still have this strange problem where, exactly 11 minutes after I close the lid, it hard powers itself off.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty impressive, and ideal for high school. I never got it to sleep properly (using Linux), though hibernation occasionally worked, but I didn't care, because I could run a full school day on those two batteries. Worst case, I'd have to hibernate, swap out the battery once, and resume -- admittedly the Powerbook has me beat there, it has about 10 mins worth of power separate from the battery, but I'd still need a few more batteries, I'd have to switch them more often, and it kind of starts to defeat the purpose of a laptop.
And I am still amazed at the fact that the only thing my Powerbook actually does better, in any significant way, is video. That's significant, it's a 17". Given the choice, I don't know which I'd choose. I'd definitely take either of them over a Macbook, though. Anything which gets that hot, or which gets that loud when it's hot, isn't worth it. I have my desktop for brute CPU strength, my laptop should be spartan and elegant.
I do seem to be a target market of 1, though.
As for patent trolling, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. They did create something very cool, even if it wasn't as profitable as I'd hoped, and it was nice to have a competitor to Intel. If I cared more, I'd take a long, hard look at those patents and their claims -- if there's any validity to them, it would seem that Intel and AMD ripping off some of their power-saving features would be killing the only edge they have. If it's a legitimate edge, they should be allowed to collect some royalties on that.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Those who can, solder, those who bottle, cork!
I don't know how long this business model will survive things like OpenCores - it's even cheaper to download the HDL for a chip for free than buy it - but they may well be successful for a while.
It's worth noting that opencores would have to gain a lot of momentum to damage ARM at this point. ARM is a company with 1,500 employees, and numerous customers with products being manufactured and on the market, right now. Most of the things on OpenCores seem like one person's university project.
Licensing an ARM core costs (ballpark figure only) $0.01 - $0.02 a chip, with the manufactured product going for $3 to $10 per chip (maybe more for the high-performance chips). For that, you-as-a-chip-manufacturer get a design which is well documented and thouroughly validated, and which many developers are already familiar with. There are mature compilers - including gcc support - simulators, and debugging tools; the company has a proven ability to provide the files, documentation and support needed to get a design into production.
Opencores might destroy ARM at some point, in the same way that Linux might destroy Apple and Microsoft at some point. It's possible, but not in the short term, and there arguably isn't a trend towards it happening.
Just my $0.02.
GPL3: now more than ever.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
There is a real possibility to strike a hard blow to this nonsense now. The the elections for the europoean parliament is comming up.
This time one of the contenders is the http://www.pp-international.net/Pirate Party. Joining the fight now means you get to decide the agenda. Joining closer to the election atleasts means you've done something.
The current agenda is:
Reform copyright to support free cluture.
Abolish the patent system.
Defend the right of privacy.
Code morphing sound a lot like a software embedded runtime cross compiler that works at the p-Code level. In other words a JIT interpreter that runs on a chip. In other words where's the innovation.
If Intel merely utilized such methods to impliment "Code Morphing" then I don't think Transmeta should have a case. If they actually reverse engineered the Transmeta chip that would be a different matter. It wouldn't be the first time Intel was caught at it, according to experts at the time, the Xeon processor was a "reversed engineered" copy of the AMD64.
davecb5620@gmail.com
You mean administer?
It would seem that since Transmeta no longer makes CPUs, they are somewhat safe from the big gun defense in industrial patent wars -- being counter-sued for violating 116 Intel patents. But their patents can still be invalidated, and you can just bet that Intel will try.
Still, though, this is all kind of stupid and it is a bit hard to see how anyone other than a few lawyers benefits from this sort of stuff. If a patent is a license granted by government for the public good, why are we still issuing the damn things when they apparently no longer promote the public good?
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
If my company had demonstrated is not good at doing business, at least I would like it to benefit science and the advancement of knowledge.
If you fail to sell true innovation then you should allow, even help, others to do so.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
.... why Intel is moving research and development to India....
3 9&from=rss
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/11/13232
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
You could sign an airtight contract with Ford before showing them your goods, forbiding them, amongst other things, to come with a similar product to the market for at least x years after your demonstration.
If somebody else came with a similar device on his own, society should not be punishing them, they should be encouraged for independent innovation.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
And thus non patent has merit.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
SCO are liars.
Transmeta at least has real patents for device that they did introduce to the market and that they want to protect under the current, completely broken, patent system.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I have also heard.
Those who can't... manage
Not sure the author
I personally am an adherent to something akin to the RMS philosophy. I believe information wants to be free, and that patents and copyrights should be gradually phased out.
That said, the facts show that Transmeta decided to play by the rules and compete in the chip business. The facts also show that they received the standard treatment from one of the two biggest technology monopolists of our age, Intel (our friend M$ being the other). Intel has a long history of anti-competitive illegal abuse of their dominant position in the marketplace.
We know this through contracts with distributors and partners that have been periodically leaked and reported on, as well as a mountain of articles detailing their abusive platform tie-ins and deceptive marketing techniques. A look at the current antitrust case brought by AMD alone is damning. Separately, each piece of the puzzle isn't blatantly illegal, but that's the game monopolists (and the mafia) play; it's hard to prove collusion and/or conspiracy.
If Transmets had never successfully fabbed a chip, or had never found a major distribution partner, you could rightfully call them a troll. The important point is that even if this was the case, Intel still stole their technology and called it their own, and is liable for massive patent violations.
But that's not the case. Transmeta tried, made a pretty damn good go of it, and was squashed. I think the only part of this in dispute is if Transmeta could bring an antitrust case like AMD against Intel as well. I wish they would, because without companies like AMD and Transmeta, today we'd be paying $2000 for a (t)Itanic clocked at 300MHz or so with no backwards (32-bit) compatibility, power saving, or other performance innovations. Instead we get to pay $100-$200 for a multi-GHz chip with all these features.
If our laws mean anything, Intel should be ground up into a fine powder and cast into the sea.
The elephant in the room that few seem to be noticing:
The patent was authorized by the Constitution so that inventions would be shared and used by others, with reasonable payment to the inventor.
These days, very few actually do that, especially in complex technical fields. If a company uses some idea, it's not because it went to the Patent Office and searched for good ideas to implement. They independently develop ideas - which may or may not have been patented by someone else. Or they draw ideas from the public domain. They rarely gain any benefit from the patented and published inventions of others. Generally one can't even give away good ideas these days, because companies fear that the "inventor" will come back and sue them, if they do follow a suggestion.
The Patent system simply doesn't work. It's a bad idea that got started when Kings passed out monopolies to their favorites. Ideas are not valuable - implementation is everything.
All the comments I have read seem to focus on Transmeta being the bad guy when a short history lesson would reveal just how plausible this is. This is from memory so the details may be a little fuzzy but back in the day Compaq had a data bus called the Tri-Flex Architecture. They owned the IP and only used it in their high end server systems. Intel asked if they could have a look-see at the technology so their products would be "compatible" with the bus. Less than a year later several Intel MB designs started showing up with a data bus strikingly similar to the Tri-Flex bus and Compaq sued. Intel is reported to have then informed Compaq they could no longer sell them processors through their OEM channel and Compaq would, hence forth, need to purchase them through retail channels. This would have greatly increased the cost to Compaq for the processors and shortly thereafter Compaq "licensed" the technology to Intel. Transmeta may not be so far off base.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
"Daddy, daddy, you misbehaved! splaft!"
Onda Technology Institute
I got 25 hits for the full phrase on Google. The earliest I see off hand is from 2001.
a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
You may be able to figure out where it is, but once you get there, you'll only find two French guys in a tower.