Feeds

Intel sues patent ‘parasite’

Chipzilla seeks $4.5m in damages, alleges AMD was hit too

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

Intel yesterday brought its significant legal weaponry to bear on little known technology company EMI Group North America. Its beef: that EMI's failed attempt to sue Intel for patent infringement was malicious -- and the company needs a good slapping. Chipzilla's suit against EMI, which demands $4.5 million in damages, essentially claims EMI is little more than company formed to wheedle money out of technology firms -- to "coerce Silicon Valley companies to makre payments simply to avoid the risk, uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation". Intel claims EMI -- which, so far as we can ascertain, has no connection with the major international music and communications company of the same name -- doesn't "manufacture, develop or produce any product or service". The original EMI vs Intel case was fought in 1995. EMI sued Intel claiming it infringed two of its patents -- patents Intel claims the company simply bought in -- for fabbing metal oxide semiconductor transistors. The case eventually went to the US Supreme Court, where it was thrown out earlier this year Despite the victory, the case cost Intel million of dollars, and now it wants them back. And just in case it seems like an example of money-grabbing, Chipzilla was at pains to point out that it's not the only company to have been targetted by EMI. The suit also alleges EMI has been attempting to force other companies, including AMD, Hyundai, Cypress Semiconductor and Winbond Electronics, into coughing up licensing fees to avoid legal challenges from EMI. Intel has a point, but there's a certain degree of 'what's sauce for the goose' about all this. Long-time Intel watchers will recall the company's highly aggressive legal department, which in the past was provided with target numbers of companies to sue. Had EMI successfully sued Intel back in 1995, there would have been a certain poetic justice in Intel's loss. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
The 'fun-nification' of computer education – good idea?
Compulsory code schools, luvvies love it, but what about Maths and Physics?
Doctor Who's Flatline: Cool monsters, yes, but utterly limp subplots
We know what the Doctor does, stop going on about it already
'Cowardly, venomous trolls' threatened with TWO-YEAR sentences for menacing posts
UK government: 'Taking a stand against a baying cyber-mob'
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Don't bother telling people if you lose their data, say Euro bods
You read that right – with the proviso that it's encrypted
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.