• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

ITC judge rules Nvidia infringes Samsung patents

layte said:
$1.5Bn You are utterly mental. That would be the largest tech based IP settlement in history. (Edit: Second to correct myself, after this: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/business/marvell-ordered-to-pay-1-54-billion-in-patent-suit.html)

Thankfully as a publicly traded company it will be easy to see from their financial results if they are suddenly having to pay out large amounts. Then we can all come back to this thread and laugh at you when it doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

Are you literally incapable of reading, Nvidia Intel settlement WAS 1.5billion, it was also over 6 years and 250mil a year....

1.5billion isn't unprecedented, I didn't say it would be 1.5billion in the first place, and it doesn't matter how much of their revenue it would account for, 250mil a year is not at all critical to a company of Nvidia's size.

But keep ignoring facts and making things up about how that amount had never occurred before and ignore that I said 100-200mil a year for anything from 5-10 years
 
Vish Petrol said:
Wherever theres Nvidia, theres AMD. Samsung would need to get an x86 licence in after buying AMD which may be quite difficult
Click to expand...

Probably no more difficult than it is now, no x86 licence for AMD / Samsung = no x64 licence for Intel, everyone's #####!
 
until they make it into a mini series and jenhsun is wearing his leather jacket its all very boring!
 
Whats to disclose? Both Nvidia and Samsung have put out statements saying its a patent swap with "no other compensation"... they arent saying which patents have been swapped but no compensation seems pretty clear what it means
 

Yeah, we don't know what patents are being licensed but who cares, the important fact is there is no compensation.
 
Unfortunate outcome imo, I would have liked to see DM right for a change.

Funny how big companies swap patents rather than money in these scenarios.
 
D.P. said:
"the settlement includes the licensing of a small number of patents by each company to the other, but no broad cross-licensing of patents or other compensation. "

No financial compensation.

Seems like they will simply stop trying to sue each other.
Click to expand...

Intel Nvidia, rather than a fine it became a cross licensing agreement in which Intel paid $1.5billion for the deal, for IP they didn't need.

Once again, it looks infinitely better to shareholders and anyone else involved to pay 1.5billion for a IP deal than as a straight up fine, it looks better than paying a 1billion fine precisely because it can be classified as anything else.

In other words the same wording Samsung/Nvidia used could have described the Intel/Nvidia deal. "The settlement includes a cross licensing deal and no other compensation"... yeah, except that cross licensing deal cost Intel $1.5billion. Intel flat out paid a 1.5billion fine in everything but name.

Nvidia were caught with their pants down, they were under threat of having products withdrawn from sale in the US(with a win in that court meaning potential wins in other courts in other markets). Nvidia had zero bargaining position as Intel didn't. In that case it wasn't an patent issue, Intel had a contract that basically said Nvidia could have access to any bus to make chipsets with. Intel decided the contract stated only the old bus thus cut Nvidia out of new chipsets when they changed to DMI. So in this case Intel weren't accused of using Nvidia patents, there was no IP deal up for grabs in terms of the eventual cross license deal. In the end they had a cross license deal which didn't enable Nvidia to continue making chipsets so did not include the actual IP that started the court case, nor were Intel trying to get any IP from Nvidia when the case went to court, yet the result was a cross licensing deal where neither used the others IP and Intel paid Nvidia $1.5bil while Nvidia paid Intel nothing at all. It was a fine, and it has a lot of similarities to this case.
 
Last edited:
Ian Evey said:
Unfortunate outcome imo, I would have liked to see DM right for a change.
Click to expand...

One day he will get something right. Until then we have to put up with his tedious and often incorrect walls of waffle. I do notice he is in full misdirect mode after being found wrong yet again.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Intel Nvidia, rather than a fine it became a cross licensing agreement in which Intel paid $1.5billion for the deal, for IP they didn't need.

Once again, it looks infinitely better to shareholders and anyone else involved to pay 1.5billion for a IP deal than as a straight up fine, it looks better than paying a 1billion fine precisely because it can be classified as anything else.

In other words the same wording Samsung/Nvidia used could have described the Intel/Nvidia deal. "The settlement includes a cross licensing deal and no other compensation"... yeah, except that cross licensing deal cost Intel $1.5billion. Intel flat out paid a 1.5billion fine in everything but name.

Nvidia were caught with their pants down, they were under threat of having products withdrawn from sale in the US(with a win in that court meaning potential wins in other courts in other markets). Nvidia had zero bargaining position as Intel didn't. In that case it wasn't an patent issue, Intel had a contract that basically said Nvidia could have access to any bus to make chipsets with. Intel decided the contract stated only the old bus thus cut Nvidia out of new chipsets when they changed to DMI. So in this case Intel weren't accused of using Nvidia patents, there was no IP deal up for grabs in terms of the eventual cross license deal. In the end they had a cross license deal which didn't enable Nvidia to continue making chipsets so did not include the actual IP that started the court case, nor were Intel trying to get any IP from Nvidia when the case went to court, yet the result was a cross licensing deal where neither used the others IP and Intel paid Nvidia $1.5bil while Nvidia paid Intel nothing at all. It was a fine, and it has a lot of similarities to this case.
Click to expand...

Dry your eyes m8. You were wrong yet again (surely you should be used to this by now?), and nobody cares about your desperate attempt to hide that by your waffling on about the Intel/NV case which was a completely different kettle of fish.

TBH I did think it would take longer than 24 hours for one of DM's anti NV fantasies to be found out, but what the heck, I told you so old chap.
 
I'm interested in the word "Other" in "no other compensation" it implies "other compensation" has already been paid....

Political word play.
 
For the love of christ, this is how business gets done, when you're about to lose a case you do a settlement and give in to the winning side to put a better face on the loss. Intel did just this, is paid a 1.5billion fine and called it IP fees, this is fact. Everyone on earth covering the story knows this was instead of the fine because it looks better.

This case is exactly the same, the losing side signs a settlement was it literally a few hours before the case was suppose to be decided in court. If Nvidia were going to get a minor fine that would be meaningless why did they settle and according to you guys give away their IP for essentially free?

Nvidia were losing, extremely badly. They went from hoping to get Samsung on infringing 7 of their patents to withdrawing 3-4, having the rest invalidated and being found guilty of infringing 3 of Samsung's patents and hours before the judgement Samsung threw away a giant win for next to nothing?

One, nothing has been proven, I said from the start that we'd see this in the financials as a new IP payment and literally nothing has changed in the past day. Nothing new happened, nothing changed, my stance from my first post to this one is this is a way for Nvidia to avoid a public fine and that we'll see the payments go out the same way the Intel payments came in, which btw stop pretty soon if they didn't already.
 
Orangey said:
It's the nvidia cru doing that, be real son.

They tried to grub too much money, got pwned, the end.
Click to expand...

I know, listen to them it so laughably bad it's pathetic. Let's run down the actual series of events.

  • Nvidia patent trolled Samsung badly
  • Samsung said bring it on and we'll see you in court
  • Nvidia got laughed out of court.
  • Samsung counterhit with IP patent breach claims on Nvidia and the courts agreed, deferring judgment until a later date.
  • Nvidia are backed into a corner and Samsung has their balls in a vice.
  • Just prior to that judgement an out of court a super secret cross licensing deal is done.

Yet we are to believe from the usual suspects that somehow Samsung and Nvidia are bestest buddies and realised they were better off helping each other out. So they burried the hatchet and Samsung just forgot the fact they were about to win a major IP infringement case, forgave Nvidia for being dicks and even more unbelievably Nvidia got a nice little earner... FFS :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
I know, listen to them it so laughably bad it's pathetic. Let's run down the actual series of events.

  • Nvidia patent trolled Samsung badly
  • Samsung said bring it on and we'll see you in court
  • Nvidia got laughed out of court.
  • Samsung counterhit with IP patent breach claims on Nvidia and the courts agreed, deferring judgment until a later date.
  • Nvidia are backed into a corner and Samsung has their balls in a vice.
  • Just prior to that judgement an out of court a super secret cross licensing deal is done.

Yet we are to believe from the usual suspects that somehow Samsung and Nvidia are bestest buddies and realised they were better off helping each other out. So they burried the hatchet and Samsung just forgot the fact they were about to win a major IP infringement case, forgave Nvidia for being dicks and even more unbelievably Nvidia got a nice little earner... FFS :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Who said anything about anyone been best friends, people have stated the outcome. It is two corporations doing what they do best. Claim/Court/verdict/agreement, They will both do what is best for them in the circumstances. Welcome to the business world.

None of this is disputed anywhere in this thread, A claim was made that there would be a large financial compensation package to Samsung, From what we have seen this is not happening, but some sort of licensing agreement that no doubt suits Samsung a lot more as they won the case.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom