NVIDIA Files Complaints Against Samsung and Qualcomm for Patent Infringement

[HumanSmoke]

^^^^^Not sure why you even quoted me - if you want to make a point that is only tangentially related to what I was talking about why bother quoting what I wrote about Nvidia's patent litigation strategy?

 

[Relayer]

Nv is green=envy/greed. Samsung will counter sue like they did with Apple

They'd best hope not. The amt' of damages Samsung could sue for could crush nVidia. No, I think that there is something of substance for nVidia to go after a giant like Samsung.

 

[Relayer]

Like AMD sue Intel more than 30 years already?

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/11/12/a-timeline-of-intel-and-amds-legal-battles/



Not in this solar system, troll.



http://www.androidcentral.com/50000-units-xiaomis-mipad-sold-just-under-four-minutes
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/0...6-million-cars-now-running-nvidia-processors/



AMD is red=rage how they want $700 for free FreeSync.



Nvidia must learned this from industry leader AMD?

http://www.cnet.com/news/intel-to-pay-amd-1-25-billion-in-antitrust-settlement/

What does any of this have to do with AMD?

"nVidia is suing Samsung and people are hating on them"

"What? Quick, say something bad about AMD."

 

[HumanSmoke]

They'd best hope not. The amt' of damages Samsung could sue for could crush nVidia.

I haven't looked at Nvidia's entire product line, but I wouldn't think there would be too much, if anything, Samsung bring suit against Nvidia for. Qualcomm might be a different case given their modem/3G/4G portfolio, but I'm guessing Nvidia did their homework before entering into this.
Any loss of revenue from Samsung's point of view would be through court order, not direct action from the complainant - I'm guessing that unless there is overwhelming evidence, the court wouldn't embargo Samsung's product line.

No, I think that there is something of substance for nVidia to go after a giant like Samsung.

Seems likely even if it's a power play to bring Samsung and QC to the table. You don't slap a gorilla if you expect it to pound you into the ground. This is one step up from the Intel lawsuit (which Intel initiated) which ended up with Nvidia picking up a sizeable wad of cash and torpedoing Larrabee's development - oddly enough, people then didn't think Nvidia had much of a chance either.

 

[1d10t]

^^^^^Not sure why you even quoted me - if you want to make a point that is only tangentially related to what I was talking about why bother quoting what I wrote about Nvidia's patent litigation strategy?

I just pointed out nVidia maneuver to stretched their patent on "Open Community" is gonna kickback in their balls hard.Samsung open their library to the community,then take cooked library and embedding them to their own chips.Getting better with zero R&D.
How about nVidia?You need a miracle to get their library even the old-screwed Tegra 3.They never support open community,so why even bother to jump to Google's Android?nVidia should join Apple then...

 

[D007]

I don't see nVidia being a patent troll here at all. They aren't throwing around injunctions to stop Samsung/Qualcomm from selling their products. They aren't asking for insane amounts of money. What they are doing is asking the courts to decide if the patents are being infringed and if so having the courts decide proper licencing fees. This is exactly how patents should work and how patent disputes should be handled.

Yep.

 

[HumanSmoke]

I just pointed out nVidia maneuver to stretched their patent on "Open Community" is gonna kickback in their balls hard.Samsung open their library to the community,then take cooked library and embedding them to their own chips.Getting better with zero R&D.
How about nVidia?You need a miracle to get their library even the old-screwed Tegra 3.They never support open community,so why even bother to jump to Google's Android?nVidia should join Apple then...

Conglomerates don't usually conduct business like 5 year-olds having schoolyard tantrums. Samsung and Apple have been at each others throats for quite a while yet it doesn't stop them from signing and extending component contracts.

 

[bencrutz]

Samsung and Apple have been at each others throats for quite a while yet it doesn't stop them from signing and extending component contracts.

yeah, like apple have better options after got screwed by tsmc

 

[HumanSmoke]

yeah, like apple have better options after got screwed by tsmc

Yeah, so screwed Apple looks to increase it's wafer starts with TSMC Yet quite happily also signs Samsung contracts. You do realize that supply and price trump sentiment in the semiconductor business, right? By your reckoning Apple should dump Qualcomm as a partner because Qualcomm has sided with Motorola/Google in their case against Apple.
By all account's, what's happening in the Electronics division doesn't matter a flying f**k to other arms of the company - divisional rivalry puts outside competition to shame. This is the simplified company structure

 

[bencrutz]

Yeah, so screwed Apple looks to increase it's wafer starts with TSMC Yet quite happily also signs Samsung contracts. You do realize that supply and price trump sentiment in the semiconductor business, right? By your reckoning Apple should dump Qualcomm as a partner because Qualcomm has sided with Motorola/Google in their case against Apple.

apple was trying to get away from samsung, well, we know how that ends up

By all account's, what's happening in the Electronics division doesn't matter a flying f**k to other arms of the company - divisional rivalry puts outside competition to shame.

don't care bout that
i just giggle reading what nv is trying to do here
nv should sue qualcomm and arm for their gpu instead of pursuing the biggest phone manufacturer, unless nv want to cut a deal and make samsung by their tegra

 

[HumanSmoke]

apple was trying to get away from samsung, well, we know how that ends up

Well, considering you're saying Apple was screwed over by TSMC (but Apple still increase chip orders with them), and you saying Apple are only with Samsung out of what? desperation? (but they still get the A9 contract) - like GloFo and UMC don't exist, I'm not sure you know how it ends up. It's almost like Apple alternate suppliers based on who gives the best deal and schedule - seems hardly credible except for the fact that Apple do the same thing with AMD and Nvidia graphics and every other component supplier as well.

i just giggle reading what nv is trying to do here

Well that's fair enough, who am I to deny someone their giggling. I must admit it is actually a source of vicarious humour to revisit these threads to see how the armchair legal experts fared in retrospect - and since Nvidia is the course derision de jour here, here's the Intel suit against Nvidia thread and the Nvidia countersuit against Intel thread ****SPOILER ALERT*** Nvidia won 1500000000 to nil

nv should sue qualcomm and arm for their gpu instead of pursuing the biggest phone manufacturer, unless nv want to cut a deal and make samsung by their tegra

Nvidia seem pretty stupid. Spending large sums of cash on legal counsel specializing in intellectual property when you could clearly have solved the entire litigation argument in the time it took to type a sentence - How dumb must they be to spend two years in licensing talks and spending 6-7 figures on lodging a filing!

 

[Eagleye]

Some cases here on AMD, not sure if they won the one against Samsung or others listed

https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/candce-275108#simple4
https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/candce-200541-advanced-micro-devices-v-samsung-electronics

 

[ValenOne]

Some cases here on AMD, not sure if they won the one against Samsung or others listed

https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/candce-275108#simple4
https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/candce-200541-advanced-micro-devices-v-samsung-electronics

From http://www.law360.com/articles/515848/amd-picks-patent-fight-with-lg-over-graphics-technology

AMD suing LG with following patents

6,784,879 - Method and apparatus for providing control of background video
6,889,332 - Variable maximum die temperature based on performance state
6,895,520 - Performance and power optimization via block oriented performance measurement and control
6,897,871 - Graphics processing architecture employing a unified shader
7,327,369 - Graphics processing architecture employing a unified shader
7,742,053 - Multi-thread graphics processing system
5,898,849 - Microprocessor employing local caches for functional units to store memory operands used by the functional units
6,266,715 - Universal serial bus controller with a direct memory access mode
7,095,945 - System for digital time shifting and method thereof


Both AMD and NVIDIA has products that uses it's patents and ARM centric GPU vendors should not escape from licensing. ARM expects companies licenses it's IP while it doesn't do the reverse for it's GPU.

 

[Steevo]

Some of those patents from both AMD and Nvidia need to disappear, like unified shaders, multi-threaded, USB DMA? We need to shorten the time any tech Patent can exist.


I wonder how many patents AMD and Nvidia share, I know both are in bed with Intel, for many and different reasons.

 

[remixedcat]

And nobody messes with Qualcomm atheros and lives.. I won't let them they make great WiFi SoCs and stuff. You piss them off they will rape every single one of the enemy and put baloney on the cars and fart on the enemys and make em suffer..


But that was hard to type be cause I like nvidia and I like Qualcomm atheros !!!!!! God damb it!!!!!!!!!!

 

[HumanSmoke]

And nobody messes with Qualcomm atheros and lives.. I won't let them they make great WiFi SoCs and stuff. You piss them off they will rape every single one of the enemy and put baloney on the cars and fart on the enemys and make em suffer..

It's all a part of the game. Qualcomm uses it's position to gain market share, and if at some time the little guys fight back, Qualcomm pays out the fines and damages. These payments are generally worth the infringements because the complainants can get some monetary recompense, but they can't gain back the market share and make headway against the current position of Qualcomm. It is basically the same company strategy that enabled Intel to keep AMD at heel and basically destroy Cyrix, Chips and Technologies, and Intergraph.
Anyhow, Nvidia are only one of a number of Qualcomm's legal problems this year:
Chinese antitrust investigation
European Union antitrust investigation
ParkerVision (who won their previous case against QC)
Bandspeed
Adaptix

 

[ValenOne]

Some of those patents from both AMD and Nvidia need to disappear, like unified shaders, multi-threaded, USB DMA? We need to shorten the time any tech Patent can exist.


I wonder how many patents AMD and Nvidia share, I know both are in bed with Intel, for many and different reasons.

That's a bias view since you haven't applied the standard for Qualcomm's cell phone patents.

And nobody messes with Qualcomm atheros and lives.. I won't let them they make great WiFi SoCs and stuff. You piss them off they will rape every single one of the enemy and put baloney on the cars and fart on the enemys and make em suffer..


But that was hard to type be cause I like nvidia and I like Qualcomm atheros !!!!!! God damb it!!!!!!!!!!

If that's the case, Qualcomm would have "copied" AMD GPU and not paid for it.

 

[remixedcat]

That's a bias view since you haven't applied the standard for Qualcomm's cell phone patents.



If that's the case, Qualcomm would have "copied" AMD GPU and not paid for it.

It's too general. Those kinda "patents" need thrown out and what Nvidia did is wrong.

 

[HumanSmoke]

It's too general. Those kinda "patents" need thrown out and what Nvidia did is wrong.

Well that's the nature of the USPTO. Another front page story here has all kinds for PR for Asetek's cooling for the 390X - the "thermal interposer" design they patented is really no more than a heatpipe base from an air cooler mated with a GPU full cover waterblock. Hardly revolutionary, and certainly combines two or more designs already patented by others.

 

[ValenOne]

It's too general. Those kinda "patents" need thrown out and what Nvidia did is wrong.

If Nvidia or AMD designed a multi-threaded unified shader GPU, then they should earn money from their IP investments.

The problem with NVIDIA's battle against Qualcomm is that AMD also has multi-threaded unified shader GPU patents and AMD using these patents to sue LG.
I don't know the licensing extent with Qualcomm's AMD IP.

In Apple vs VIA/S3 battle, AMD got involved with S3 texture compression IP issue i.e. AMD counters VIA/S3 (on behalf of Apple) that AMD owns S3 texture compression IP/patents i.e. AMD fought another PC GPU vendor (i.e. VIA S3) in the patent/IP area.

Both AMD and NVIDIA has large GPU patent landmines.

From https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/candce-275108#simple2
One of LG's products being targeted by AMD is LG's G2 which has Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 SoC.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Update:

http://venturebeat.com/2015/04/06/nvidia-wins-a-round-in-patent-case-against-samsung-and-qualcomm/

From the horses mouth:

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/04/06/itc-favorable-ruling/

 

[Xzibit]

Update:

http://venturebeat.com/2015/04/06/nvidia-wins-a-round-in-patent-case-against-samsung-and-qualcomm/

From the horses mouth:

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/04/06/itc-favorable-ruling/

NOTICE OF INITIAL DETERMINATION ON VIOLATION OF SECTION 337
Administrative Law Judge Thomas B. Pender

C-NET Nvidia dealt blow in bid to block Samsung shipments into US

Thomas B. Pender, an administrative law judge for the US International Trade Commission, wrote that Samsung didn't infringe on Nvidia's graphics patents. He also determined one of Nvidia's three patents is invalid because the technology had already been covered in previously known patents.

 

[Relayer]

NOTICE OF INITIAL DETERMINATION ON VIOLATION OF SECTION 337
Administrative Law Judge Thomas B. Pender

C-NET Nvidia dealt blow in bid to block Samsung shipments into US

So, let me see if I understand. What they are saying is that the claim is written correctly?

 

[Xzibit]

That link was to the document before the judge signed it. Its since been moved (Link below)

So, let me see if I understand. What they are saying is that the claim is written correctly?

The judge determined there were no violations.

 

[Xzibit]

Its over now

Law360 - Samsung, Qualcomm Triumph At ITC In Nvidia Patent Fight