tl;dr: Cooler Master AIO coolers steal Asetek patents, court ruled favorably to Asetek.

btarunrtl;dr: Cooler Master AIO coolers steal Asetek patents, court ruled favorably to Asetek.

Which in turn bones AMD's Fury X supply, because they use Cooler Master blocks. (info from @HumanSmoke)

RCoonWhich in turn bones AMD's Fury X supply, because they use Cooler Master blocks. (info from @HumanSmoke)

Probably why Fury X is very scarce in the US market, and there are plenty of Nanos and air-cooled Furies.

ASETEK – Court confirms judgement, increases damages award and issues injunction

That seems to be the place where everyone is getting the news from. Since most site are coping that word for word.

XzibitASETEK – Court confirms judgement, increases damages award and issues injunction

That's what the TPU post is referencing, is there something hidden? Thought the link might have showed what products are banned and who it (3rd party) would affect.

There are a few hybrid coolers (EVGA) on cards that could be affected too.

No just wanted to point it out since BT didn't add a source.

the54thvoidThat's what the TPU post is referencing, is there something hidden? Thought the link might have showed what products are banned and who it (3rd party) would affect.

There are a few hybrid coolers (EVGA) on cards that could be affected too.

Doubtful that the EVGA Hybrid's would be affected - they source their liquid cooling from Asetek, not Cooler Master. Likewise, Arctic Cooling should also be in the clear ( the Accelero Hybrid) for the same reason.

I suspect Cooler Master will just pass on the royalty cost to the ODM/OEM's using their product - and will probably just have to suck it up for those products already in the wild.

the54thvoidThat's what the TPU post is referencing, is there something hidden? Thought the link might have showed what products are banned and who it (3rd party) would affect.

There are a few hybrid coolers (EVGA) on cards that could be affected too.

EVGA and MSI source from Asetek. MSI even gives Corsair a cut.

patenttrolls strike again

btarunrtl;dr: Cooler Master AIO coolers steal Asetek patents, court ruled favorably to Asetek.

Steal? They made their own design. Asetek seems to think they're the only company in the world that has the right to make sealed loop liquid cooling systems and have sued every other company that has even tried to enter the market. How they even hold a patent for this is insane.
Yes, they have the right to patents with regards to their waterblock, pumps etc. but they shouldn't be able to have a patent on sealed loop liquid cooling, as it blocks any and all competition.

What about Swiftech? The use pump/block combos. It could very well be that the internal design is the same. An AIO might look the same externally but the internal engineering may be quite different?
Just thinking out loud mind and they may well be patent trolls riding on a dodgy patent. The US patent system isn't fit for purpose after all.

Could we (the knowledgeable enthusiast) push for a boycott of Asetek based products in protest?

TheLostSwedeSteal? They made their own design. Asetek seems to think they're the only company in the world that has the right to make sealed loop liquid cooling systems and have sued every other company that has even tried to enter the market. How they even hold a patent for this is insane.
Yes, they have the right to patents with regards to their waterblock, pumps etc. but they shouldn't be able to have a patent on sealed loop liquid cooling, as it blocks any and all competition.

They hold patents on the integration of the pump into the block, not on CLCs itself...

And I'd call a 1-to-1 copying stealing: CoolerMaster left; Asetek right

iOThey hold patents on the integration of the pump into the block, not on CLCs itself...

And I'd call a 1-to-1 copying stealing: CoolerMaster left; Asetek right

I guess you and I must have a different view on what a 1-to-1 copy is then.
There are clearly some similarities, but how many different ways can you do a pump? It's not as if Asetek invented the pump.

I'm not trying to defend either company here, as Cooler Master has clearly taken some privileges, but it's not the first company Asetek has gone after.
This is very much on the same topic - www.asetek.com/press-room/news/2015/asetek-announces-positive-conclusion-of-lawsuit-with-coolit-systems-inc/
It seems to be that Asetek is becoming something of a patent troll, as they clearly can't stand any kind of competition and if they make as superior products as they claim, shouldn't the products speak for themselves, rather than Asetek having to sue every other company even looking like they'll do a liquid cooling solution?

TheLostSwedeI guess you and I must have a different view on what a 1-to-1 copy is then.
There are clearly some similarities, but how many different ways can you do a pump? It's not as if Asetek invented the pump.

I'm not trying to defend either company here, as Cooler Master has clearly taken some privileges, but it's not the first company Asetek has gone after.
This is very much on the same topic - www.asetek.com/press-room/news/2015/asetek-announces-positive-conclusion-of-lawsuit-with-coolit-systems-inc/
It seems to be that Asetek is becoming something of a patent troll, as they clearly can't stand any kind of competition and if they make as superior products as they claim, shouldn't the products speak for themselves, rather than Asetek having to sue every other company even looking like they'll do a liquid cooling solution?

Yeah I guess we do have a different view as some parts are so similar to each other that they are almost interchangeable. Link to article: www.legitreviews.com/120mm-water-cooler-round-up-part-2-looking-inside_129601

I'm not trying to defend them either as they are acting like a troll and their sueing will only getting worse, as this patent covers liquid cooled add-in-boards in general: www.freepatentsonline.com/20130058038.pdf

But CoolerMaster clearly cloned some of their products and now has to face the consequences.
Others were able to do CLCs without infringing the patent: www.antec.com/product.php?id=706542&pid=58&lan=nz

Well, CM did at one point do something fairly unique, but I seem to remember this was another product they got in legal trouble over.

www.dvhardware.net/article4746.html

That said, going by the 1-to-1 logic, then Zalman ought to be next to get in legal trouble, or maybe Asetek doesn't care about them, since they have a tiny market share...

pump in block is the patent. If pump is on rad.. no problem. It's a legit patent.


And so, FuryX is never coming to Canada, and this is why cards are still on pre-order? That doesn't make any sense. Why the Nano costs $650? Yeah, that might explain a bit.

cadavecapump in block is the patent. If pump is on rad.. no problem. It's a legit patent.


And so, FuryX is never coming to Canada, and this is why cards are still on pre-order? That doesn't make any sense. Why the Nano costs $650? Yeah, that might explain a bit.

Perhaps very true.

There are only 3 Fury X's available in UK at OcUK but they have 26+ Nano's.

the54thvoidPerhaps very true.

There are only 3 Fury X's available in UK at OcUK but they have 26+ Nano's.

Well, when Asetek sued Coolermaster the last time (for the Glacer 240), and those were barred from sale in the US, they were still available in the NA market via NCIX. So the idea that there are no cards here I nCanada because of this does not make sense. Canada is NOT the US, and most definitely has completely different legal arrangements both for business and for the private citizen.

Yet, I check the local store today, and XFX's FuryX is in stock, but one card in a city that is a 28 hour drive away, and that store doesn't ship. Dammit.

Nano also available, but also not local. Nano is also $40 less than FuryX.

So... perhaps this does not affect AMD cards here in Canada so much.

TheLostSwedeI guess you and I must have a different view on what a 1-to-1 copy is then.

It is not the centrifugal pump, probably is more the placement to the housing, the shape of the volute in respect the impeller profile, along with internal channeling, all characteristics that minimizes air pockets and cavitation it all the various positions.

Looking at the two it’s a sure bet, CoolerMaster did not come away with that indistinguishable layout without embracing the Asetek’s design. Sure one might explore it for guidance, but only to the point designer grasps the extents of the patents, and comes away with critical departures so not to infringe on those patents, and it doesn’t appear they did that.

EDIT: After looking at the two pictures provided, I notice a subtle difference in the impeller and how each works with the volute. Notice the tip clearance on the Asetek “leads in” on the sweep and then relieves on the discharge. The CoolerMaster appear to have a significantly open sweep on the lead-in, while holds a tight clearance as it discharges. That can be enough to deviate the other characteristics in other internal profiles to differ enough to cause air and noise to be a difference in the overall design structure.

CasecutterI know... I do pumps.

kinky

ZoneDymopatenttrolls strike again

This isn't a case of patent trolls. A patent troll sues over patents they never intend to use in their own products. Asetek actually produces products using these patents. This is a case of a legit patent holder protecting their products.

Not every company that sues about patents is a patent troll.

cadavecapump in block is the patent. If pump is on rad.. no problem. It's a legit patent.

This.

cadavecaAnd so, FuryX is never coming to Canada, and this is why cards are still on pre-order? That doesn't make any sense. Why the Nano costs $650? Yeah, that might explain a bit.

It is possible for CoolerMaster to continue to sell their products. They just have to pay royalties to Asetek for using Asetek's patent. They also have to pay the back royalties before they can begin selling the infringing products again.

This is another reason this isn't a patent troll case. Patent trolls tend to just want huge settlements and ask for huge unreasonable royalties. Asetek asked the courts to set a fair licensing amount, which the courts did at 14.5%. CoolerMaster F'd up by appealing, which in a unanimous decision is often viewed by the appeal judge as a waste of time or stall tactic, so the appeal judge penalized CoolerMaster even more by raising the royalty fee to 25%.

Also, the injunction just went into affect with the latest ruling, so it should not have affected supply before this decision.

Asstek

newtekie1It is possible for CoolerMaster to continue to sell their products. They just have to pay royalties to Asetek for using Asetek's patent. They also have to pay the back royalties before they can begin selling the infringing products again.

This.

newtekie1This is another reason this isn't a patent troll case. Patent trolls tend to just want huge settlements and ask for huge unreasonable royalties. Asetek asked the courts to set a fair licensing amount, which the courts did at 14.5%. CoolerMaster F'd up by appealing, which in a unanimous decision is often viewed by the appeal judge as a waste of time or stall tactic, so the appeal judge penalized CoolerMaster even more by raising the royalty fee to 25%.

The stall tactic using the appeal process would just be a strategy for CM to pump(!) out as much product as possible before having to integrate the royalty payment into their revenue structure. Litigation fees would very likely be much less than the royalties that needed to be apportioned, and it also maintains CM's market share at their current pricing structure. Having to factor in the royalties and incorporating them into pricing is very likely going to affect their competitiveness in securing contracts against Asetek products. No real revelation. Intel (amongst other high profile examples) have used the same drawn out appeal process to entrench themselves in the market in the past.

newtekie1Also, the injunction just went into affect with the latest ruling, so it should not have affected supply before this decision.

Very sound. If cadaveca's theory held water that would imply that AMD knew that CoolerMaster were infringing and expected the judgement - if that were the case, why accept CM's business in the first place? Was CM's pump whine music to AMD's ears?

HumanSmokehe stall tactic using the appeal process would just be a strategy for CM to pump(!) out as much product as possible before having to integrate the royalty payment into their revenue structure. Litigation fees would very likely be much less than the royalties that needed to be apportioned, and it also maintains CM's market share at their current pricing structure. Having to factor in the royalties and incorporating them into pricing is very likely going to affect their competitiveness in securing contracts against Asetek products. No real revelation. Intel (amongst other high profile examples) have used the same drawn out appeal process to entrench themselves in the market in the past.

According to the ruling, the royalties are retroactive back to Jan 1 2015. So CoolerMaster really isn't saving on royalties by stalling. All it did was piss the judge off and put CoolerMaster in a worse position.

I think the real reason for appeal was not to stall, but instead in hopes the appeals judge would lower the royalty amount. It backfired.