|
|
Rambus sues Nvidia for patent infringement
Lawsuit relates to 17 memory controller patents that Nvidia has allegedly been infringing for years
Lawsuits against other tech companies for patent infringement appear to be quickly becoming a essential fashion accessories in the chip business. This year, we’ve not only seen Ultra attempting to sue almost every other PSU manufacturer over modular cables, but we’ve also seen Seagate suing SSD manufacturer STEC for patent infringement too. The latest company to jump on the patent is RDRAM and XDR creator Rambus, who has filed a lawsuit against Nvidia for allegedly infringing 17 of Rambus’ patents.
According to Rambus, the lawsuit relates to ‘a number of Nvidia products with memory controllers for SDR, DDR, DDR2, DDR3, GDDR, and GDDR3 SDRAM.’ This encompasses a number of Nvidia’s chip designs, which Rambus says includes GPUs, media communications processors (MCPs) and ‘other products from at least six Nvidia product lines.’
Rambus hasn’t yet revealed which specific patents have been infringed by Nvidia, but says that it’s seeking monetary damages as well as ‘injunctive relief barring the infringement, contributory infringement, and inducement to infringe the Rambus patents.’
Rambus claims that it’s tried to resolve the matter a number of times with Nvidia, but with no result. Rambus’ senior vice president, Tom Lavelle, claims that ‘for more than six years, we have diligently attempted to negotiate a licensing agreement with Nvidia, but our good faith efforts have been to no avail.’ Lavelle also said that situation is always getting worse, as Nvidia apparently ‘infringes more and more of our patents’ as it ‘advances its product portfolio.’
Lavelle said that Rambus felt the lawsuit was its only course of action, but said that Rambus would be happy to ‘continue discussions with Nvidia to reach a negotiated settlement.’
Reddit | Technorati
well if nvidia have evidence that they developed the technology on their cards/boards from scratch then they have nothing to fear... if on the other hand they have 'borrowed' the principles from Rambus... they are in trouble.
Comment by NewParadigm at 1:44pm 14th July 2008
I'm sure Intel were major share holders in RAMBUS, and with the on going saga of Intel v nvidia..........
Comment by swapshop at 11:42pm 13th July 2008
I'm pretty sure RAMBUS have looked at nVidia's technology and thought "hang on, this all seems a tad familiar" Usually when this kind of ting happens, a company liek RAMBUS will make the effort to find out if nVidia is using their PATENTED technology or whether it has developed it all by itself and it just happens to do a similar thing - usually when this happens then the company that creates the 'similar' technology would also patent their efforts so no-one else steals it. Researching, developing,, testing - and paying the people to do all of that - is very expensive and time consuming and usually its around £200-300 just to apply for the patent itself. So yes, patents are there for a good reason, it's not like the music industry being greedy and stupid by saying radio is in breach of copyright, this actually a case of a company putting in huge amounts of time money and effort into making a good piece of tech, only to have another company come along and use it without asking. It's not a case of RAMBUS 'being jealous because nVidia made a success out of it' that isn't the point. If I decided your house would be good as a hotel and started renting it out without telling you and keeping all the profit for myself, you'd probably be a little annoyed because it's your house, you bought it, you run it, you work for it and here's me making your house a successful hotel and keeping all the money.
Comment by EdArch at 2:06pm 13th July 2008
In my opinion; if someone creates something, and then manages to acquire a patent for it, they have the right to take anyone to court who they feel infringes that copyright agreement. Those who are saying this is all a money making scheme, think for a second how expensive this could be if they loose. I think they must be quietly confident that Nvidia have infringed their patent enough (now) to warrant taking the graphics giant to court.
Comment by TKSnatch at 4:30am 13th July 2008
Yes but if someone invents something without the help of another company, through a different method, then it's (sometimes) it's not an infringement of patent. The idea of a patent is to protect someone's effort and hard work in making a product, but if someone else puts in the same effort or more to make a product that does the same thing, but maybe makes it through a different method and the product works in a slightly different way, then (at least in my opinion) that shouldn't be infringement. There's the example of BIOS programmers in IBM and computer's early days, when companies would tell programmers what another BIOS/code does and ask them to program something to do that, without letting them see the original code. That way, it wasn't a copy, but it still had the same function. I have no idea if this wasn't the case with Rambus and nVidia, and I can understand Rambus' perspective as a company that's struggling through hard times, but really all these patent lawsuits are tiring. I'm actually a bit annoyed at myself right now for getting caught up in the politics of it all.
Comment by TWeaKoR at 8:47pm 12th July 2008
"since, it's been shown that a lot of patented technologies would have been invented by someone else soon after anyway" Yes of course, but that is hardly the point of patents is it? That was most noob-ish comment I have ever heard about patents The whole point of patents is to protect companies like Rambus so that they can invest in R&D without getting their innovations "stolen" by an other company. Rambus clearly was the first to file the patents. So their strengths are in R&D rather than marketing and product launch, that doesnt warrant someone to misuse their patents
Comment by jonisaksson at 8:32am 12th July 2008
17 United States Patent 7,209,997 Farmwald , et al. April 24, 2007 Controller device and method for operating same -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,751,696 Farmwald , et al. June 15, 2004 Memory device having a programmable register -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,564,281 Farmwald , et al. May 13, 2003 Synchronous memory device having automatic precharge -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,496,897 Ware , et al. December 17, 2002 Semiconductor memory device which receives write masking information -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,493,789 Ware , et al. December 10, 2002 Memory device which receives write masking and automatic precharge information -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,470,405 Barth , et al. October 22, 2002 Protocol for communication with dynamic memory -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,287,109 Barth , et al. October 23, 2007 Method of controlling a memory device having a memory core -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,330,952 Barth , et al. February 12, 2008 Integrated circuit memory device having delayed write timing based on read response time -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,330,953 Barth , et al. February 12, 2008 Memory system having delayed write timing -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,360,050 Barth , et al. April 15, 2008 Integrated circuit memory device having delayed write capability -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,287,119 Barth , et al. October 23, 2007 Integrated circuit memory device with delayed write command processing -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,210,016 Ware , et al. April 24, 2007 Method, system and memory controller utilizing adjustable write data delay settings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,177,998 Ware , et al. February 13, 2007 Method, system and memory controller utilizing adjustable read data delay settings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,591,353 Barth , et al. July 8, 2003 Protocol for communication with dynamic memory -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,260,097 Farmwald , et al. July 10, 2001 Method and apparatus for controlling a synchronous memory device -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,304,937 Farmwald , et al. October 16, 2001 Method of operation of a memory controller -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,715,020 Farmwald , et al. March 30, 2004 Synchronous integrated circuit device --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment by sabatino at 9:19pm 11th July 2008
17 United States Patent 7,209,997 Farmwald , et al. April 24, 2007 Controller device and method for operating same -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,751,696 Farmwald , et al. June 15, 2004 Memory device having a programmable register -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,564,281 Farmwald , et al. May 13, 2003 Synchronous memory device having automatic precharge -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,496,897 Ware , et al. December 17, 2002 Semiconductor memory device which receives write masking information -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,493,789 Ware , et al. December 10, 2002 Memory device which receives write masking and automatic precharge information -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,470,405 Barth , et al. October 22, 2002 Protocol for communication with dynamic memory -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,287,109 Barth , et al. October 23, 2007 Method of controlling a memory device having a memory core -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,330,952 Barth , et al. February 12, 2008 Integrated circuit memory device having delayed write timing based on read response time -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,330,953 Barth , et al. February 12, 2008 Memory system having delayed write timing -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,360,050 Barth , et al. April 15, 2008 Integrated circuit memory device having delayed write capability -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,287,119 Barth , et al. October 23, 2007 Integrated circuit memory device with delayed write command processing -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,210,016 Ware , et al. April 24, 2007 Method, system and memory controller utilizing adjustable write data delay settings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 7,177,998 Ware , et al. February 13, 2007 Method, system and memory controller utilizing adjustable read data delay settings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,591,353 Barth , et al. July 8, 2003 Protocol for communication with dynamic memory -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,260,097 Farmwald , et al. July 10, 2001 Method and apparatus for controlling a synchronous memory device -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,304,937 Farmwald , et al. October 16, 2001 Method of operation of a memory controller -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Patent 6,715,020 Farmwald , et al. March 30, 2004 Synchronous integrated circuit device --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment by sabatino at 9:19pm 11th July 2008
3DFx sued them over what we now call shaders, nVidia bought them and took the market by storm.
Comment by Initialised at 7:57pm 11th July 2008
So, RAMBUS (as DudQuitter said, "ha ha ha!") are suing Nvidia for infringing on thier patents. So, RAMBUS, a company which has spectacularly failed in a number of market endeavours is suing a company for successfully marketing a product? This is another case of over-valuing a patent (since, it's been shown that a lot of patented technologies would have been invented by someone else soon after anyway) and under-valuing the difficulty and risk associated with successfully marketing a product. A tax on inovation, I say!
Comment by evanjdooner at 6:46pm 11th July 2008
if its there work then why shouldn't they? but i wouldn't be surprised if half the lawsuits for tec inst just simultaneous development and someone got there name on it first. but i don't know much about hardware design, so im probably miles wrong. I just cant imagine any company copying a product directly. modular power supply's, i think thats just good common design, my house has a modular power supply, they all have 3 pins and are located in the walls. i think its a little unfair that they were allowed to patent that.
Comment by TBallS at 5:57pm 11th July 2008
that this is just another company trying to survive through this stressful time in the IT world, due to the lack of cash at the moment... just a shame that they have to survive off Nvidias money to get through this...
Comment by NikoBellic at 3:43pm 11th July 2008
Haha, if they wanted to, NVIDIA would just could judt buy them out.
Comment by C7ouD at 3:33pm 11th July 2008
Make a Comment
- Windows 7’s official name revealed
- Top 10 PC games chart
- Introversion launches Save Multiwinia campaign
- Rumour control: 55nm GeForce 200-series GPUs on the way
- High-speed Seagate SSDs coming next year
- User Account Control to be relaxed in Windows 7
- OCZ's first CPU waterblock released
- Nvidia head lambasts Larrabee
- Intel has ‘serious questions’ about AMD split
- Custom PC folding team takes number 6 position
These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.
- Intel has ‘serious questions’ about AMD split
- Rumour control: 55nm GeForce 200-series GPUs on the way
- Nvidia head lambasts Larrabee
- User Account Control to be relaxed in Windows 7
- High-speed Seagate SSDs coming next year
- OCZ's first CPU waterblock released
- Introversion launches Save Multiwinia campaign
Broadband Dongles
Fastest, cheapest 3G mobile broadband dongles from 3, Vodafone, T-Mobile and Orange
from just £10/month
