# Ultra Products Sues Power Supply Manufacturers



## malware (Apr 9, 2008)

There's not a lot of information on the web regarding this case filled in the Florida Middle District Court, but it seems that Ultra Products is now searching for legal ways to sue a whole bunch of power supply manufacturers that infringe on of their patents for modular power supplies. The companies that are being sued by Ultra Products include: Antec, Corsair Memory, Enhance Electronics, E-Power Technology/PCMCIS, FSP Group USA, Koolance USA, Mushkin, OCZ Technology, Sea Sonic Electronics, Silverstone Technology, SPI Electronic, Spire-Bytecom Fanner Corporation, Tagan Technology, Thermaltake Technology, Topower Computer Industrial, Topower Computer U.S.A., Zalman Technology Company and pretty much every company that has manufactured modular PSUs.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## xfire (Apr 9, 2008)

It seems to be a great time to be a lawyer.


----------



## Wile E (Apr 9, 2008)

Well, this is bad news. Was Ultra the first to market with a modular psu?


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 9, 2008)

yep the X-Connect started it


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

Performance-PCs was the first to sell modular PSUs I believe.  At least that's what they boast.  Ultra may have been the first to patent it, and if they did exclusively, they're going to make a BOATLOAD of money!


----------



## Exceededgoku (Apr 9, 2008)

There'll be legal loopholes, such as Silverstone could say they use a modular powersupply with 8 pins instead of 4. It really depends how well Ultra patented their idea...


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

I agree.  They would have had to be super-broad, and I don't think that's possible with patents because then there would be too many monopolies.


----------



## patton45 (Apr 9, 2008)

Ultra was the first modular psu and the frist modular psu from other companys were very similar to the ultra but most companies have special features and new designs and features like esa  so it wont suprise me if this law suit will cover psu manufactured between a certian time frame


----------



## pentastar111 (Apr 9, 2008)

This is ridiculous!...That's like Ford suing Chrysler for making cars...or Mcdonalds suing Jack-in-the-crack for selling burgers...pretty fracking lame if you ask me...:shadedshu


----------



## choppy (Apr 9, 2008)

pentastar111 said:


> This is ridiculous!...That's like Ford suing Chrysler for making cars...or Mcdonalds suing Jack-in-the-crack for selling burgers...pretty fracking lame if you ask me...:shadedshu



EXACTLY!! its ridiculous! i guess when your not selling much its the only way to make to quick buck eh


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

pentastar111 said:


> This is ridiculous!...That's like Ford suing Chrysler for making cars...or Mcdonalds suing Jack-in-the-crack for selling burgers...pretty fracking lame if you ask me...:shadedshu



umm no this is not the same thing as that ultra came up with a good idea that sold well now a bunch of people have copied that idea and ultra isn't making as much money off it. this is like lets say chevy started putting hemi's in there cars and trucks would dodge sue? HELL YEA! that was ultra's idea and they have evrey right to defend it this is what patents are for.


----------



## Megasty (Apr 9, 2008)

I saw this coming a long time ago. The first one to patent an idea wins. Performance-PCs was the first to do it but what made no sense is why they didn't patent it. Ultra perfected it though. Most of the _copies_ out there really do look like cheap knockoffs


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Ulnless I'm an idiot, the companies Ultra is suing aren't PSU manufacturers. Hell, I'm pretty Ultra has PSUs rebranded as well. I'm quite positive there are only a few actual manufacturers, such as with optical drives, blank disc media, etc.

Ultra should be suing the manufacturers for allowing other companies to use the modular interface.


----------



## Evo85 (Apr 9, 2008)

Everybody suing everybody these days.....


 Very sad   :shadedshu


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

Megasty said:


> I saw this coming a long time ago. The first one to patent an idea wins. Performance-PCs was the first to do it but what made no sense is why they didn't patent it. Ultra perfected it though. Most of the _copies_ out there really do look like cheap knockoffs



are you kidding me, of all the makers of modular PSUs, I would have to say I like Ultra the least.  Antec, OCZ, Silverstone, Seasonic, Topower, ECT. are all better PSUs than Ultra.  Im not saying Ultra are crap, but they are no were near the best.

Patent laws are a tough topic, I dont think it will be too hard for the companys to wiggle out of this.  They might even just settle really low to make Ultra shutup.  To me this is a sign that Ultra is down for the count right now.  

Ultra was hot when they were the only Modular manufactorer, I remember When I had the xconnect 550, it was great.  But it died after 8 months of normal use.  Not that great.....

Since other companies have made modular there is very little reason to get an Ultra, and this is just an attack to try to revive the company however it can


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

GJSNeptune said:


> Ulnless I'm an idiot, the companies Ultra is suing aren't PSU manufacturers. Hell, I'm pretty Ultra has PSUs rebranded as well. I'm quite positive there are only a few actual manufacturers, such as with optical drives, blank disc media, etc.
> 
> Ultra should be suing the manufacturers for allowing other companies to use the modular interface.



Antec, Corsair Memory, Enhance Electronics, E-Power Technology/PCMCIS, FSP Group USA, Koolance USA, Mushkin, OCZ Technology, Sea Sonic Electronics, Silverstone Technology, SPI Electronic, Spire-Bytecom Fanner Corporation, Tagan Technology, Thermaltake Technology, Topower Computer Industrial, Topower Computer U.S.A., Zalman Technology Company

All those companies manufactor their own PSUs.  Some antecs are made by Seasonic(earthwatts), but all the manufacturers make their own Modular PSU


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Seasonic makes Corsair's HX PSUs.

Hmm. I guess I read something awhile ago that was purely made up. Now I know!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_computer_hardware_manufacturers#Power_supplies

(I'm a raging idiot.)


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

asb2106 said:


> are you kidding me, of all the makers of modular PSUs, I would have to say I like Ultra the least.  Antec, OCZ, Silverstone, Seasonic, Topower, ECT. are all better PSUs than Ultra.  Im not saying Ultra are crap, but they are no were near the best.
> 
> Patent laws are a tough topic, I dont think it will be too hard for the companys to wiggle out of this.  They might even just settle really low to make Ultra shutup.  To me this is a sign that Ultra is down for the count right now.
> 
> ...



just cause its not the best doesn't make it any less there patent on modular cabling

i doubt ultra is down right now they sell tons of crap anywhere from DDR2 to cases hell they even have some HSF


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

But imagine the excitement when someone brings up, "Hey, we can sue for modular! That's like two dozen companies!"


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

cdawall said:


> just cause its not the best doesn't make it any less there patent on modular cabling
> 
> i doubt ultra is down right now they sell tons of crap anywhere from DDR2 to cases hell they even have some HSF



hey Im not saying they arent right about their patent.  But Im pretty sure that patent is not broad enough to cover that.  Maybe it does, who knows.

And we are not talking about DDR2 and HSFs, just PSUs, and I can personally speak for the quality.  It was definitly lacking..... Maybe I got a dud, but I though 170 bucks would have gotten me a decent 550W PSU


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

GJSNeptune said:


> But imagine the excitement when someone brings up, "Hey, we can sue for modular! That's like two dozen companies!"



Exactly, 

IF this was really an issue dont you think they would have done this 2 years ago when Antec and a bunch of other companies already had modulars out????

Its not about the patent, they need money


----------



## intel igent (Apr 9, 2008)

this is a joke, ultra is crap and this lawsuit reaffirms that fact.

there's been moduar PSU's in the market for what? 5-6 yrs?

ultra =


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Companies always wait years before they sue. Let the culprits make lots of money from infringing, and then sue them for all of it.


----------



## erocker (Apr 9, 2008)

This is a joke!  The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Does Ultra make wall outlets?


----------



## erocker (Apr 9, 2008)

No, but a wall outlet is a "modular" plug-in design, which Ultra has clearly infringed upon!
 I just hope this isn't in American court, I would hate to spend a dime of tax money on any type of judicial process for this garbage.


----------



## JrRacinFan (Apr 9, 2008)

Only thing I have to say about this is that it's bad karma. What goes around comes around, no offense but I hope they lose and get countersuited.

EDIT: In other words, people cant leave well enough alone.


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

erocker said:


> No, but a wall outlet is a "modular" plug-in design, which Ultra has clearly infringed upon!
> I just hope this isn't in American court, I would hate to spend a dime of tax money on any type of judicial process for this garbage.



HAHAHAHA

This is so true, BTW, thanks erocker and intel-igent for agreein, its really true, ultra is crap PSUs and they are tankin now and want to take someone down with them


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

I'd buy a PSU from a lot of the companies they're suing before I'd buy one of theirs.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 9, 2008)

Only in america *sigh*


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

@ erocker he gets paid every time someone uses it


----------



## patton45 (Apr 9, 2008)

asb2106 said:


> hey Im not saying they arent right about their patent.  But Im pretty sure that patent is not broad enough to cover that.  Maybe it does, who knows.
> 
> And we are not talking about DDR2 and HSFs, just PSUs, and I cant personally speak for the quality.  It was definitly lacking..... Maybe I got a dud, but I though 170 bucks would have gotten me a decent 550W PSU




thats probally why that same 550watt psu is 40$ on tiger direct now 
ultra made ok psu it was hit or miss they had good effeciency for a modular but the other companies deffinatly perfected modular.


----------



## jbunch07 (Apr 9, 2008)

i honestly thought ultra had the first modular psu but i may be wrong...
in any case it was a good idea for whoever did it first



> This is a joke! The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!


 that is a good point though


----------



## trog100 (Apr 9, 2008)

erocker said:


> This is a joke!  The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!



yes.. i dont see how anyone can patent plugs and sockets.. the idea has been around for a while.. he he he

trog


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 9, 2008)

Exceededgoku said:


> There'll be legal loopholes, such as Silverstone could say they use a modular powersupply with 8 pins instead of 4. It really depends how well Ultra patented their idea...




Then read the patent.  It's right out on the web for you to read.  It's not really as broad as a lot of people here seem to think it is.  The claims are actually quite narrow.  They simply patented the concept of the modular interface on the housing of the PSU (which is why the Performance-PC's one is different.  It's not a modular interface on the housing) and when you take that into consideration you'll realize that the Ultra X-Connect was the first modular power supply in that respect and all of these modern day "modular" power supplies does infringe on the patent.


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

jonnyGURU said:


> Then read the patent.  It's right out on the web for you to read.  It's not really as broad as a lot of people here seem to think it is.  The claims are actually quite narrow.  They simply patented the concept of the modular interface on the housing of the PSU (which is why the Performance-PC's one is different.  It's not a modular interface on the housing) and when you take that into consideration you'll realize that the Ultra X-Connect was the first modular power supply in that respect and all of these modern day "modular" power supplies does infringe on the patent.



can you link the site that you read this at?


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 9, 2008)

asb2106 said:


> can you link the site that you read this at?



http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...d=PTXT&s1=7,133,293&OS=7,133,293&RS=7,133,293


----------



## spy2520 (Apr 9, 2008)

cdawall said:


> umm no this is not the same thing as that ultra came up with a good idea that sold well now a bunch of people have copied that idea and ultra isn't making as much money off it. this is like lets say chevy started putting hemi's in there cars and trucks would dodge sue? HELL YEA! that was ultra's idea and they have evrey right to defend it this is what patents are for.



off topic, but technically all multi-valve engines have hemi combustion chambers and most racing bodies like IHRA prostock have hemi heads on dodge, chevy, and ford motors. Dodge just likes putting the badge on shit, but nobody can use the HEMI brand on cars, so i guess you are kinda right with that analogy.


----------



## AddSub (Apr 9, 2008)

I don't know why everyone is against Ultra, but they are one of the few PSU makers/distributors offering lifetime PSU warranties upon registration. Actually, I don't know if any other PSU makers do that. 

I have 3 Ultra PSU's. Two are modular (titanium silvery slick looking ones) and one is a lower end model. Never had any problems with any of them. The lower end model  has been running in my server for over two years now, almost 24/7 and I mean quite literally 24/7. I'm talking perhaps about  2-3 hours of downtime every month at the most. Second one, a modular one, has been running in my media box for about year and half, not 24/7 operation but almost. Also no problems. Third one, also modular, has been in my primary machine (specs on the left) for over a year and a half, gaming mostly (handles my EVGA 8800GTX just fine). 

As for the whole modular patent suit, I don't know. I believe Ultra was first to introduce them in North America, not sure. I remember reading a review about  3 years ago or so regarding the "first" modular PSU and it was an Ultra model. It was the first time I heard of a modular PSU anyways.


----------



## a111087 (Apr 9, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> yep the X-Connect started it



alright, so they waited years, so more companies would do the modular design and then coma in and say "ALL of you are thieves!"


----------



## Solaris17 (Apr 9, 2008)

i have an ultra x-connect 500w solid psu hasnt failed at all...everytime i mod i check volts and amps they they havent degraded any...


@addsub

really they offer warranties? how do you register?


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

AddSub said:


> I don't know why everyone is against Ultra, but they are one of the few PSU makers/distributors offering lifetime PSU warranties upon registration. Actually, I don't know if any other PSU makers do that.
> 
> I have 3 Ultra PSU's. Two are modular (titanium silvery slick looking ones) and one is a lower end model. Never had any problems with any of them. The lower end model  has been running in my server for over two years now, almost 24/7 and I mean quite literally 24/7. I'm talking perhaps about  2-3 hours of downtime every month at the most. Second one, a modular one, has been running in my media box for about year and half, not 24/7 operation but almost. Also no problems. Third one, also modular, has been in my primary machine (specs on the left) for over a year and a half, gaming mostly (handles my EVGA 8800GTX just fine).
> 
> As for the whole modular patent suit, I don't know. I believe Ultra was the first one to introduce them in North America, not sure. I remember reading a review about  3 years ago or so regarding the "first" modular PSU and it was an Ultra model. It was the first time I heard of a modular PSU anyways.



Well yes, I mean you could get a no name PSU in a $30 case, and it could run 24/7 in a system that is not stressed, and it could work forever. 

But I was running 2 7800GTX's with a Pentium D and 3 HD's, and a creative sound card and 2 DVDrw drives.  It obviously could not keep up with the demand.  Even though I was guarenteed by their tech depo that it could easily support SLI with as many HDs as I want.  Thats what they told me.  Granted Ill never believe that again, I was younger and dumber.  

It might be a great PSU for a average system, but for a performance system, if just cannot keep up.  Especially when OCing is involved.  and my buddies xconnect over heated and fried a few connections on the modular connections inside the PSU.  I dont think it was overheating, I think is was just pushing to much amps through the gauge wire they used.  

Sorry to burst your bubble but Ultra is far from quality.  Its average at best, and that perfect for 95% of computer users.


----------



## AddSub (Apr 9, 2008)

> really they offer warranties? how do you register?



Yes, they do. It is done through their website. (Link below) All their power supplies come with a 3 year warranty out of the box, but if you register online you get upgraded to lifetime.

http://www.ultraproducts.com/warranty_info.php

Note: as per their site *"Product must be registered within 30 days from the date of purchase."*

It takes about a minute or two to register. Really easy.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Apr 9, 2008)

AddSub said:


> I don't know why everyone is against Ultra, but they are one of the few PSU makers/distributors offering lifetime PSU warranties upon registration. Actually, I don't know if any other PSU makers do that.
> 
> I have 3 Ultra PSU's. Two are modular (titanium silvery slick looking ones) and one is a lower end model. Never had any problems with any of them. The lower end model  has been running in my server for over two years now, almost 24/7 and I mean quite literally 24/7. I'm talking perhaps about  2-3 hours of downtime every month at the most. Second one, a modular one, has been running in my media box for about year and half, not 24/7 operation but almost. Also no problems. Third one, also modular, has been in my primary machine (specs on the left) for over a year and a half, gaming mostly (handles my EVGA 8800GTX just fine).
> 
> As for the whole modular patent suit, I don't know. I believe Ultra was first to introduce them in North America, not sure. I remember reading a review about  3 years ago or so regarding the "first" modular PSU and it was an Ultra model. It was the first time I heard of a modular PSU anyways.



what is the point of a lifetime warranty on a piece of crud? im goign to need another one to se anyway when it gets shipped for retrns. and what about the eqipment it may or may not have killed on the way out?


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

US Patent 7133293 said:
			
		

> The present invention relates to power supplies and methods of installing power supplies. More particularly, one embodiment of the present invention relates to a power supply adapted for installation within a computer case for receiving AC current from an AC current source and providing DC current from the power supply to a component disposed inside of the computer case via a removable cable attached to the power supply, comprising: a housing having an interior volume defined by a top panel, a bottom panel and a plurality of side panels; AC to DC circuitry disposed within the interior volume of the housing; and a DC output socket, wherein the DC output socket is fixed to one of the top panel, bottom panel and side panels defining the interior volume in which the AC to DC circuitry is disposed; wherein the AC to DC circuitry receives AC current from the AC current source; wherein the AC to DC circuitry converts the received AC current into DC current and supplies the DC current to the DC output socket; and wherein the DC output socket is fixed to one of the panels of the housing in a position such that when the power supply is installed within the computer case the DC output socket is disposed inside of the computer case for mating with the removable cable.



This is the description of the patent right on the site, to me all this explains is the conversion of AC to DC with sockets on the DC side for you parts.

This description could describe the cigarette lighter in your car......


----------



## Solaris17 (Apr 9, 2008)

AddSub said:


> Yes, they do. It is done through their website. (Link below) All their power supplies come with a 3 year warranty out of the box, but if you register online you get upgraded to lifetime.
> 
> http://www.ultraproducts.com/warranty_info.php
> 
> ...



thnx  damn to bad i bought it over a year ago


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 9, 2008)

tigger69 said:


> Only in america *sigh*


LoL, lets not get into that, Europe has enough as well. . .


erocker said:


> This is a joke!  The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!


Thats funny!  Unfortunately they specify PSU housing, not just housing ; P


jonnyGURU said:


> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...d=PTXT&s1=7,133,293&OS=7,133,293&RS=7,133,293


Thank you!


Sorry I glanced through the patent but didn't see the specifics (don't have time for a thorough reading).
I think its stupid a company would wait like this, though it happens often.
I think it shows Ultra is hurting in this field.
In my personal experience I have found Ultras to be decent but I would not buy them with other available options.


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 9, 2008)

asb2106 said:


> This is the description of the patent right on the site, to me all this explains is the conversion of AC to DC with sockets on the DC side for you parts.
> 
> This description could describe the cigarette lighter in your car......



They do specify power supplys for personal computers all over the page.  Including describing at least one fan in them.


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

Darkrealms said:


> They do specify power supplys for personal computers all over the page.  Including describing at least one fan in them.



well yah, but thats it, thats a very broad specrum for a patent.  I dont have time to dig through all the patents inside of it, I will later, but I just dont see Ultra getting anywhere with this.  I could very well be wrong though


----------



## infrared (Apr 9, 2008)

Here's everything ultra has patented. Just reading through it now.


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Yeah, they shouldn't be hurting for money.


----------



## thebeephaha (Apr 9, 2008)

Ultra is lame. This just makes me think they are even lamer.


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

GJSNeptune said:


> Yeah, they shouldn't be hurting for money.



maybe its this lifetime warrenty killing them, all the PSUs they have to replace he he


----------



## trog100 (Apr 9, 2008)

i aways thought a patent had to be somehow unique.. something different.. i dont see the idea of detachable plug in cables unique.. 

what strikes me as odd is that they were granted a patent for such a mundane idea in the first place.. plugs and sockets on the AC side of a psu dont strike me as worthy of a patent..

and where the f-ck does "modular" come in whats removable cables got to do with "modular".. all very odd.. 

trog


----------



## MKmods (Apr 9, 2008)

Patents are patents. If the others stole Ultras idea they are gonna pay.(thats why God invented attorneys)

I think Ultra may be on its way out and needs a bit of cash or publicity.


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 9, 2008)

meh who cares, what they do doesnt effect me and you


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 9, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i aways thought a patent had to be somehow unique.. something different.. i dont see the idea of detachable plug in cables unique..
> 
> what strikes me as odd is that they were granted a patent for such a mundane idea in the first place.. plugs and sockets on the AC side of a psu dont strike me as worthy of a patent..
> 
> ...



This has already been addressed in this thread by those who have actually taken the time to read the patent.

The patent is for the modular interface on the housing.  The claim is narrow enough to where the only thing that is patented is not the cables or the fact that they're removable, but the fact that there is an interface on the housing that allows the cables to be modular, ergo, removable.  It's also stated in the patent that this is for a device that is inside a personal computer and that the removable cables are those that supply DC power to other devices inside the computer.

I know the legalese makes it difficult to understand, but it is all right there.  It's not as vague as some people here are making it out to be and it's not an "old idea" that Ultra just decided to patent.


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 9, 2008)

a111087 said:


> alright, so they waited years, so more companies would do the modular design and then coma in and say "ALL of you are thieves!"




Actually, they didn't "wait years".  The patent was applied for in 2004.  It wasn't issued by the USPO until late 2006.  It's now early 2008.  AFAIK, cease and desist letters were sent out initially, so you have to wait for everyone to respond to those first.  Offer them the opportunity to pay licensing fees, etc.  Add to that the fact that the legal costs to bring this to court must be huge and something I wouldn't expect anyone to jump into with hastily.

The time-line seems very tight to me.


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

WOW.  They patented a lot of stuff...I guess they've got ideas guys over there, just not quality control or sense to use high-end components.


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

DanishDevil said:


> WOW.  They patented a lot of stuff...I guess they've got ideas guys over there, just not quality control or sense to use high-end components.



HA  HA  HA 



jonnyGURU said:


> Actually, they didn't "wait years".  The patent was applied for in 2004.  It wasn't issued by the USPO until late 2006.  It's now early 2008.  AFAIK, cease and desist letters were sent out initially, so you have to wait for everyone to respond to those first.  Offer them the opportunity to pay licensing fees, etc.  Add to that the fact that the legal costs to bring this to court must be huge and something I wouldn't expect anyone to jump into with hastily.
> 
> The time-line seems very tight to me.



Oh yah, ceise and desist, I bet that worked well on the big companies HEHE.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Apr 9, 2008)

Oh well...another company I will NOT be buying ANYTHING from, just like Creative! :shadedshu I absolutely hate companies which bring ridiculous lawsuits like these against great companies like Antec, Corsair etc. Apparently if you can't produce great-quality PSU's you need too sue the competition, eh? Truly sad.


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 9, 2008)

If your going to build a product its always best to read patents and check, Ultra is in full leagal right to do this, and remember if the go bankrupt the PSU makers still don't have the ability to use it, as it is still patent infringment


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

1c3d0g said:


> Oh well...another company I will NOT be buying ANYTHING from, just like Creative! :shadedshu I absolutely hate companies which bring ridiculous lawsuits like these against great companies like Antec, Corsair etc. Apparently if you can't produce great-quality PSU's you need too sue the competition, eh? Truly sad.



ummm that makes no sense your saying that because a company makes a good product its above the law?


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 9, 2008)

1c3d0g said:


> Oh well...another company I will NOT be buying ANYTHING from, just like Creative! :shadedshu I absolutely hate companies which bring ridiculous lawsuits like these against great companies like Antec, Corsair etc. Apparently if you can't produce great-quality PSU's you need too sue the competition, eh? Truly sad.


Like *candle_86* said below it doesn't matter if your a good or bad (quality) company.  It matters that you came up with an idea and you patent it.  If others copy it, it is your RIGHT to take legal action against them.


candle_86 said:


> If your going to build a product its always best to read patents and check, Ultra is in full leagal right to do this, and remember if the go bankrupt the PSU makers still don't have the ability to use it, as it is still patent infringment



By the law.  This either makes all other companies using Ultras idea either inept for not looking up the information before they start making a product or unlawful for knowingly infringing on their patents.


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 9, 2008)

DanishDevil said:


> WOW.  They patented a lot of stuff...I guess they've got ideas guys over there, just not quality control or sense to use high-end components.


I believe recently it was posted that IBM requests 5000 patents a year, so Ultra really doesn't have many patents at all.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 9, 2008)

jonnyGURU said:


> This has already been addressed in this thread by those who have actually taken the time to read the patent.
> 
> The patent is for the modular interface on the housing.  The claim is narrow enough to where the only thing that is patented is not the cables or the fact that they're removable, but the fact that there is an interface on the housing that allows the cables to be modular, ergo, removable.  It's also stated in the patent that this is for a device that is inside a personal computer and that the removable cables are those that supply DC power to other devices inside the computer.
> 
> I know the legalese makes it difficult to understand, but it is all right there.  It's not as vague as some people here are making it out to be and it's not an "old idea" that Ultra just decided to patent.



i did read the article dude.. i and i still dont see the the idea of plugs and sockets on the AC (inside) of a bloody PC psu as original.. 

call it what u like its plugs and sockets stuck on something that previously didnt have plugs and sockets.. very original.. 

ultra might be the first to be cheeky enough to patent such an (unoriginal idea) and i am still amazed that they got away with it..

which probably explains why so many seem to have broken the patent.. it never occurred to them that such an unoriginal idea was under a patent.. it wouldnt to me.. 

but i am just a normal kinda dude.. who thinks in a normal kinda way not a member of the legal profession..

but as u say its all there.. my views are that in a vaguely sane world it shouldnt have been allowed to be all there.. the patent should never have been granted.. 

trog


----------



## asb2106 (Apr 9, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> If your going to build a product its always best to read patents and check, Ultra is in full leagal right to do this, and remember if the go bankrupt the PSU makers still don't have the ability to use it, as it is still patent infringment



So you think that these big manufactorers are gonna stop making modular PSU's??

I sure as hell dont, Im really thinking this is gonna end it a deal out side out court.  It will save both sides alot of money, Ultra will get some cash out of it, and everyone will be happy - including us.


----------



## panchoman (Apr 9, 2008)

this does seem like a legit and sueable lawsuit, because if "modular cabling for psu's" was the patent, then a lot of companies may end up having to pay a lot of money --> modular psus may become ultra exclusives or licensing will be involved --> rise in the price of modular psu prices. 

thank god pp&c isn't affected


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

PCP&C doesn't have modular PSUs I don't think. But maybe that's what you were implying.


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

I think that's exactly what he's implying.

But keep in mind, OCZ bought PCP&P.  OCZ has modular PSUs...


----------



## panchoman (Apr 9, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> meh who cares, what they do doesnt effect me and you



it'll affect us when modular psus or even psus in general rise in price or modular psus become an ultra only affair. also it would force small psu companies to go under.

and yes, pp&c has never and probably never will make modular psu's, as modular cabling can lead to more voltage resistance and corrosion and things trapped in the modular ports can really screw things up, and this is against pp&c's quality check etc.

though ocz does own pp&c, pp&c might get affected by this.


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

I agree, but it would take a very "by the books" judgement for Ultra to get a large settlement.

I highly doubt this will truly affect us a _whole_ lot.  I think the judgement in this case will have to take into account the market that it will affect, and therefore, it would be an unsound call to give Ultra exclusive rights to modular PSUs.


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

If Ultra became the sole manufacturer of modular PSUs, non-modular PSUs would surely make a comeback.


----------



## panchoman (Apr 9, 2008)

they've got a patent though so in the court of law, it should be honored.. i mean the song happy birthday is copy righted for damns sake.


----------



## csplayer089 (Apr 9, 2008)

ultra sucks. its like the house brand of computer parts. this lawsuit probably wont go very far.


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

GJSNeptune said:


> If Ultra became the sole manufacturer of modular PSUs, non-modular PSUs would surely make a comeback.



Don't really know what you mean by this.  I'm assuming you mean that they will become more readily available, and companies will start playing off the fact that non-modular is better because there is less of a voltage drop with hardwiring than with connectors, but a lot of people, like me, would much prefer a modular PSU over non-modular, simply to keep unneeded and unwanted cables out.

What I hope comes of this if it does come down to Ultra being the only modular PSU manufacturer is that Ultra actually starts churning out some awesome high-end PSUs.



panchoman said:


> they've got a patent though so in the court of law, it should be honored.. i mean the song happy birthday is copy righted for damns sake.



I have a different view on this.

In California, as well as many other states, we have a term called "Spirit of the Law" versus "Letter of the Law" that is used in regards to Law Enforcement.

Say a newlywed couple is sitting on the beach sharing a couple of glasses of wine watching the sunset together.  The law is, no alcohol on the beach.  _Letter of the Law_ says that you cite them both.  _Spirit of the Law_ allows you to make a reasonable decision on the action to take.  Under _Spirit of the Law_, you could still cite them, leave them alone, or simply let them know that there is no alcohol allowed on the beach, and ask them to stop drinking it.

I think a similar decision will take place.  If they would have caught this earlier, say right after the patent passed, then maybe it wouldn't have such a drastic effect on the market.  I think because 60% (or somewhere around there...) of PSUs that system builders buy are modular, Ultra won't end up getting all they could possibly get.

Also keep in mind the term monopoly.  Patents aren't meant to create them.  If Ultra gains exclusive rights to manufacturer modular PSUs, then they will be a monopolist in the modular PSU market.  I have faith that the government will not let this happen.  If they do find that Ultra deserves a settlement, I believe that smaller PSU companies will die, but they will ensure to not bankrupt all the companies to create a monopoly.


----------



## panchoman (Apr 9, 2008)

thats just bias, just cause you think that they are a crap brand doesn't mean that their patent claim and suit aren't legit.


----------



## MKmods (Apr 9, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i did read the article dude.. i and i still dont see the the idea of plugs and sockets on the AC (inside) of a bloody PC psu as original..
> 
> call it what u like its plugs and sockets stuck on something that previously didnt have plugs and sockets.. very original..
> 
> ...




I dont think its plugs and sockets. Ultra actually made a circut board that attaches to the ps.
The Silverstone modular I have has plugs actually on the case (loose, not attached to a circut board) 
I dont think that would be a copy. But using a PCB to attach the plugs to I think is what Ultra patented.


----------



## pentastar111 (Apr 9, 2008)

cdawall said:


> umm no this is not the same thing as that ultra came up with a good idea that sold well now a bunch of people have copied that idea and ultra isn't making as much money off it. this is like lets say chevy started putting hemi's in there cars and trucks would dodge sue? HELL YEA! that was ultra's idea and they have evrey right to defend it this is what patents are for.


  Well, a few companies did. Ford came out with a "Hemi" style engine, the Boss 429 http://www.hotrod.com/featuredvehicles/113_0609_ford_boss_429/photo_05.html and Oldsmobile also had a few monster 455 Hemi style test engines actually built and running....http://tech.classicoldsmobile.com/32.shtml The Ford model found it's way into mustangs and if my memory serves me right, a few others for nascar...The Olds  project model coming too late in the game, was scrapped because of the the new emission requirements, rising costs to insure the high powered cars, the cost to produce this engine and the final death nell for all of the really big powerplants was of course the first big "oil crisis" of the early 70's.... To my knowledge Chrysler did not sue anybody over any patents and neither should Ultra...all PSU's look alike in some ways, they do the same things yet are built a little different from company to company. Unless they are being built using Ultra's blueprints and are exactly like an ultra, Ultra is wasting theirs and everybody elses time...


----------



## jtleon (Apr 9, 2008)

*Lets consider the Patent for a minute*

Here's the abstract.

United States Patent 7,313,000 Fiorentino , et al. December 25, 2007 Power distribution system for a personal computer

Abstract The present invention relates to power supplies, methods of installing power supplies, power distribution systems and methods of installing power distribution systems. More particularly, one embodiment of the present invention relates to a power distribution system for receiving AC current from an AC current source and for distributing DC current inside of a computer case.
Inventors: Fiorentino; Carl (Miami, FL), Kuo; Chih-Wei (Taipei, TW) Assignee: Ultra Products, Inc. (Miami, FL)
Appl. No.: 11/065,617 Filed: February 23, 2005


As you can see, the TigerDirect Kingpin Carl is the inventor.

As an engineer with my own patent, it appears Carl has a rock solid case against all who sell in the U.S. and possibly abroad. That is why patents exist - to promote and protect inventions.

See attached image from page 2 of the patent.

Check out the patent date - Dec 2007 - Carl has been building his case for the past 3 months - no Patent Attorney would touch it if it was not golden!

Regards,

jtleon


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

pentastar111 said:


> Well, a few companies did. Ford came out with a "Hemi" style engine, the Boss 429 http://www.hotrod.com/featuredvehicles/113_0609_ford_boss_429/photo_05.html and Oldsmobile also had a few monster 455 Hemi style test engines actually built and running....http://tech.classicoldsmobile.com/32.shtml The Ford model found it's way into mustangs and if my memory serves me right, a few others for nascar...The Olds  project model coming too late in the game, was scrapped because of the the new emission requirements, rising costs to insure the high powered cars, the cost to produce this engine and the final death nell for all of the really big powerplants was of course the first big "oil crisis" of the early 70's.... To my knowledge Chrysler did not sue anybody over any patents and neither should Ultra...all PSU's look alike in some ways, they do the same things yet are built a little different from company to company. Unless they are being built using Ultra's blueprints and are exactly like an ultra, Ultra is wasting theirs and everybody elses time...



this is more how i meant it



spy2520 said:


> off topic, but technically all multi-valve engines have hemi combustion chambers and most racing bodies like IHRA prostock have hemi heads on dodge, chevy, and ford motors. Dodge just likes putting the badge on shit, but nobody can use the HEMI brand on cars, so i guess you are kinda right with that analogy.



looks like i wasn't the only one with that view 



panchoman said:


> thats just bias, just cause you think that they are a crap brand doesn't mean that their patent claim and suit aren't legit.





cdawall said:


> ummm that makes no sense your saying that because a company makes a good product its above the law?


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

DanishDevil said:


> Don't really know what you mean by this.



I meant that I would prefer a non-modular PSU over anything Ultra puts out. 

Not nearly as bad as Powmax, I'll give them that.


----------



## cdawall (Apr 9, 2008)

GJSNeptune said:


> I meant that I would prefer a non-modular PSU over anything Ultra puts out.
> 
> Not nearly as bad as Powmax, I'll give them that.



actually some of there newer parts are made by seventeam like the x-pro 750w seventeam is a very good OEM who makes silverstones PSUs


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 9, 2008)

meh make your own if they stop making them, you need some wire cutters, crimpers and readily avaible electrical plugs


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Yeah right. I'm even a little apprehensive about modding my Sunbeam Rheobus' LEDs with resistors. I've never even soldered before.


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

You're worried about soldering?  I'd be worried about accidentally touching a capacitor and getting blown across the room...


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

I'm not dumb enough to mod it while it's on. 

(It's still NIB)


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

Capacitors in PSUs can hold a deadly charge for up to 3 months after the unit has been powered on...


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 9, 2008)

who said doing it inside your computer, give me a week to get the parts i need and ill show you what i mean


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Apr 9, 2008)

DanishDevil said:


> Capacitors in PSUs can hold a deadly charge for up to 3 months after the unit has been powered on...



Yes I know this from personal experience...  been shocked...  not that bad, good thing I touched it with the back of my hand.


----------



## GJSNeptune (Apr 9, 2008)

Huh? Are we talking about my mod project?


----------



## jbunch07 (Apr 9, 2008)

DanishDevil said:


> You're worried about soldering?  I'd be worried about accidentally touching a capacitor and getting blown across the room...







thats his avatar after he does that

jk man dont take that offensively


----------



## DanishDevil (Apr 9, 2008)

^lawl

Yeah, back on topic guys.  We can bring this PSU shocking thing to another forum 

Or, we could start one in the postwhore thread @ TechFuzion hehe


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 9, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i did read the article dude.. i and i still dont see the the idea of plugs and sockets on the AC (inside) of a bloody PC psu as original..
> 
> call it what u like its plugs and sockets stuck on something that previously didnt have plugs and sockets.. very original..
> 
> ...



Your very response above tells me you didn't read it... or much of it... or didn't understand what you were reading.

There's no mention of "plugs and sockets inside" the PSU... certainly no "AC" sockets... other than Ultra describing how the product is used. 

In patents, to narrow a claim, you not only have to describe what exactly you're patenting, but you have to describe it in context to the device in which the patented item is being used with.  Furthermore, you have to describe the application of the device and how it is used over all.  So that includes describing how it's a PSU, that converts AC to DC, installed inside a PC, powering peripherals, etc.  So if you only skim the patent, I imagine you could walk away with the conception of "Oh crap, Ultra just patented a power supply with cables that unplug... how can they get away with that?"

Like I said, they didn't patent the "idea" of modularizing a power supply.  They patented the interface on the housing of the PSU that the cables plug into.  That is something that had not been done prior to the patent being filed in 2004.  If you go to the US ITC website, search by date, put in the date of the complaint (04/04/08) and then scroll down to the Ultra suit and click to show "more sections" you'll see 17 100 page scanned PDF's of all of the "exhibits" which include prior art that LOOKS modular, but are not used in the same application, or claim to be modular but do not make the product modular in the same fashion.  That's another thing you have to do when you patent something and that's reveal and potential prior art and explain why your patent is not actually related to that prior design.

It's not a "patent of plugs and sockets" and if you actually read and understood the patent you'd understand why I think you're response is a bit off base.

Now beer me....


----------



## pentastar111 (Apr 10, 2008)

This kind of debating is EXACTLY why I keep coming to TPU......


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 10, 2008)

cough, the plug designs are different, so i dont see how they can sue, also it sounds like their sales are down because they are trying to sue others.


----------



## Nemesis881 (Apr 10, 2008)

The irony of all this....my Ultra PSU isn't modular


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 10, 2008)

eidairaman1 said:


> cough, the plug designs are different, so i dont see how they can sue....



They didn't patent the plugs themselves.  Again, they patented the modular interface attached to the housing of a PSU with plugs (non-specific) for the DC output cables to interface with.  

But I do agree that sales might be down or something.  I mean, I have no factual data on that or anything, but I was reading the ITC complaint and they're actually suing one of their own OEM's.    That's no way to maintain good business relations.  Andyson is listed as a defendant because they made modular PSU's for Aerocool, Hiper and Sunbeam (none of the companies are in the market anymore either... are they???) that infringed on the Ultra patent... yet Andyson is also the company that makes the X3 series of power supplies.

WTF?!?


----------



## candle_86 (Apr 10, 2008)

pentastar111 said:


> Well, a few companies did. Ford came out with a "Hemi" style engine, the Boss 429 http://www.hotrod.com/featuredvehicles/113_0609_ford_boss_429/photo_05.html and Oldsmobile also had a few monster 455 Hemi style test engines actually built and running....http://tech.classicoldsmobile.com/32.shtml The Ford model found it's way into mustangs and if my memory serves me right, a few others for nascar...The Olds  project model coming too late in the game, was scrapped because of the the new emission requirements, rising costs to insure the high powered cars, the cost to produce this engine and the final death nell for all of the really big powerplants was of course the first big "oil crisis" of the early 70's.... To my knowledge Chrysler did not sue anybody over any patents and neither should Ultra...all PSU's look alike in some ways, they do the same things yet are built a little different from company to company. Unless they are being built using Ultra's blueprints and are exactly like an ultra, Ultra is wasting theirs and everybody elses time...



Actully Dodge built the first hemi in 1941 and used it in the Jeeps they built for WW2. The Crysler Hemi doesnt patten the hemi shape at all, just the angel of the hemi, so anyone else can do it, just not with the same angel


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 10, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> Actully Dodge built the first hemi in 1941 and used it in the Jeeps they built for WW2. The Crysler Hemi doesnt patten the hemi shape at all, just the angel of the hemi, so anyone else can do it, just not with the same angel



And that's a PERFECT example of how these patents work.  You HAVE TO narrow your claim.  If others infinge, fine.  You sue.  If someone wants to use your idea and copy it exactly, they should have to pay.  Otherwise, come up with a new idea.  Change it enough to where it no longer infringes.


----------



## Wile E (Apr 10, 2008)

If Ultra wins this, why not just move the modular interface outside of the housing? Have the modular plug on say, a 1" lead. Sure, it won't be as neat, but it would still serve it's purpose.


----------



## jbunch07 (Apr 10, 2008)

Wile E said:


> If Ultra wins this, why not just move the modular interface outside of the housing? Have the modular plug on say, a 1" lead. Sure, it won't be as neat, but it would still serve it's purpose.



not a bad idea but i agree it wouldn't look all that pretty


----------



## hacker111 (Apr 10, 2008)

Hey can I be there lawyer?


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Apr 10, 2008)

erocker said:


> This is a joke!  The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!





Good point.


----------



## ex_reven (Apr 10, 2008)

erocker said:


> This is a joke!  The guy who invented electical wall outlets should sue Ultra for infringing on his design!



Lol thats what I was thinking.


----------



## EnergyFX (Apr 10, 2008)

thebeephaha said:


> Ultra is lame. This just makes me think they are even lamer.



Why thank you for such a substantiated and scientific analysis.  You obviously have superior insight on this matter.

I can run along now and purchase a power supply knowing that I have been enlightened by brilliant research.


----------



## jtleon (Apr 10, 2008)

*Just a minute All, Do we understand design patents here?*

I see lots of comments here, that would indicate perhaps some clarification is in order on what exactly a design patent embodies.

At USPTO, the layman definition of a design patent specifies a unique characteristic, or feature, that has yet to be documented in the history of patents.

The USPTO is rather strange (as compared to other countries), in that it seeks to identify the first instance of an invention, rather than the first recorded patent of said invention.

Carl's patent in this case seeks to patent the concept of a detachable power distribution system existing internally to a PC chassis.

After almost 3 years of review (since the application was filed in early 2005), the USPTO could not find any "first instances" prior to early 2005, of such a detachable power distribution system in prior art.  As a result, the USPTO granted Carl a patent - as it should.

Kudos to Carl for having the foresight/patience to seek a patent.  Note that a US patent protects Carl against US sales of his idea by foreign manufacturers, regardless of other country patents that may exist (even at an earlier date).  This remains to be one of the HUGE challenges of a World marketplace.  The World does not have a World Patent Office that can govern the global marketplace.

Regards,
jtleon


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 10, 2008)

jtleon said:


> I see lots of comments here, that would indicate perhaps some clarification is in order on what exactly a design patent embodies.
> 
> At USPTO, the layman definition of a design patent specifies a unique characteristic, or feature, that has yet to be documented in the history of patents.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info.  But by this you are saying even if it did exist in Australia for example it could still be patented in the US?  Or does their research for an earlier instance search world wide?


----------



## Darkrealms (Apr 10, 2008)

jonnyGURU said:


> They didn't patent the plugs themselves.  Again, they patented the modular interface attached to the housing of a PSU with plugs (non-specific) for the DC output cables to interface with.
> 
> But I do agree that sales might be down or something.  I mean, I have no factual data on that or anything, but I was reading the ITC complaint and they're actually suing one of their own OEM's.    That's no way to maintain good business relations.  Andyson is listed as a defendant because they made modular PSU's for Aerocool, Hiper and Sunbeam (none of the companies are in the market anymore either... are they???) that infringed on the Ultra patent... yet Andyson is also the company that makes the X3 series of power supplies.
> 
> WTF?!?


I think what Ultra is trying to do is get their OEM for supplying other companies with their idea.  
Its like you making the SPORK and having an OEM build it for you because of their production capability.  You give them the right to build it for you, but you find out they built it for Dixie as well.  Because Dixie has been around forever and already has global connections they are able to sell your SPORK everywhere.


----------



## jtleon (Apr 10, 2008)

*Patent Protection Only follows the Money Trail*



Darkrealms said:


> Thanks for the info.  But by this you are saying even if it did exist in Australia for example it could still be patented in the US?  Or does their research for an earlier instance search world wide?



Yes that is exactly what I am saying.  No worldwide search is performed.

Patents protect the inventor in the country in which the invention is sold.  For example:

Sell in US : Need US Patent
Sell in AUS : Need AUS Patent
Sell in Japan : Need Japan Patent
etc.

On the other hand, if you give away the invention, you cannot be sued.

Regards,
jtleon


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 10, 2008)

jonnyGURU said:


> And that's a PERFECT example of how these patents work.  You HAVE TO narrow your claim.  If others infinge, fine.  You sue.  If someone wants to use your idea and copy it exactly, they should have to pay.  Otherwise, come up with a new idea.  Change it enough to where it no longer infringes.



So its not a Hemispherical Head Design, just a slant?


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 11, 2008)

Darkrealms said:


> I think what Ultra is trying to do is get their OEM for supplying other companies with their idea.
> Its like you making the SPORK and having an OEM build it for you because of their production capability.  You give them the right to build it for you, but you find out they built it for Dixie as well.  Because Dixie has been around forever and already has global connections they are able to sell your SPORK everywhere.



Right... but to my knowledge, Andyson only made modular product prior to becoming the OEM for Ultra and the companies that Andyson did make those products for prior no longer make modular products (example:  Hiper's Mark II are not modular.  The original Type R is EOL.  And Aerocool... when's the last time you saw those guys???)  

Never mind all that even, it's just the notion of suing your OEM.  I mean, are these going to want to work with you moving forward?  I would think not.  A company has THE RIGHT to choose who to do business with.  If someone I'm doing business with tells me that they're going to sue me for something I did for someone else, I'm going to tell them to piss off when it comes to doing any future business.



jtleon said:


> Yes that is exactly what I am saying.  No worldwide search is performed.
> 
> Patents protect the inventor in the country in which the invention is sold.  For example:
> 
> ...



True, prior art patents are limited to the countries of the patent, but you still have to prove that what's being designed isn't "obvious" in order for it to hold up in court.  So if some company called Artlu made modular power supplies in Australia 10 years ago, isn't it in Ultra's best interest to find information on that product, patented or not, if they expect to collect any kind of licensing fees from others making the products in the U.S.?  At least in the eyes of the jury that will be deciding the outcome of this case?


----------



## jtleon (Apr 11, 2008)

*What Jury...of U.S. Citizens or AUS Citizens or both?*



jonnyGURU said:


> True, prior art patents are limited to the countries of the patent, but you still have to prove that what's being designed isn't "obvious" in order for it to hold up in court.  So if some company called Artlu made modular power supplies in Australia 10 years ago, isn't it in Ultra's best interest to find information on that product, patented or not, if they expect to collect any kind of licensing fees from others making the products in the U.S.?  At least in the eyes of the jury that will be deciding the outcome of this case?



In this Florida court, if this case goes to a jury trial, the jury will consist of U.S. Citizens.  It is immaterial that an Australian (or other) manufacturer has been building a modular PSU for 100 years, if that PSU was never sold in the U.S.

Of course, a U.S. Court has no jurisdiction over another Country, rather over U.S. based commerce.  If the AUS mfctr is importing their modular PSU to sell in the U.S., they must conduct such business in accordance with U.S. laws, including patent laws.  Regardless if an AUS patent exists, that is immaterial to sales in the U.S. (a U.S. patent is needed).  This unfortunately illustrates the need for a World Patent Office.

Regards,
jtleon


----------



## jonnyGURU (Apr 11, 2008)

jtleon said:


> In this Florida court, if this case goes to a jury trial, the jury will consist of U.S. Citizens.  It is immaterial that an Australian (or other) manufacturer has been building a modular PSU for 100 years, if that PSU was never sold in the U.S.



Really?  I was thinking that a defendant could bring forward prior art from another country and say "this was done years ago therefore the design is obvious and Ultra shouldn't have been granted in the first place" but the sounds of it, you're thinking that this would get dismissed because the case is not the validity of the patent in the U.S. but the infringement of the patent in the U.S.  Right?

Man... I almost want to see this televised on CourtTV.


----------



## jtleon (Apr 14, 2008)

*JonnyGURU You Are Correct!*



jonnyGURU said:


> Really?  I was thinking that a defendant could bring forward prior art from another country and say "this was done years ago therefore the design is obvious and Ultra shouldn't have been granted in the first place" but the sounds of it, you're thinking that this would get dismissed because the case is not the validity of the patent in the U.S. but the infringement of the patent in the U.S.  Right?



Yes indeed, the Patent Office is not on trial here.

Regards,
jtleon


----------

