The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Crushing $1.17bn Marvell patent judgment could set record

Curtains for US chipmaker?

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

A Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania jury has found chipmaker Marvell guilty of infringing patents owned by Carnegie Mellon University, resulting in what could prove to be the largest patent damage award in US history.

As reported by The Wall Street Journal, the jury awarded the university a judgment of $1.17bn after determining that Marvell chips developed for use in hard disk drives infringed on CMU-owned patents.

That figure tops the record-setting $1.05bn awarded to Apple in its patent suit against Samsung, although Judge Lucy Koh has yet to finalize the amount owed in that case.

In a particularly damaging blow to Marvell, however, jurors also found that the company was aware of the CMU patents when it developed its infringing technology. Under US law, such a finding of willful infringement could allow US District Judge Nora Barry Fischer to increase the damages in the case to as much as triple the figure awarded by the jury.

If Judge Fischer chose to impose the maximum penalty, it would leave Marvell with a total bill of $3.51bn – an amount equal to 92 per cent of the company's current $3.82bn market valuation.

A relative newcomer in the US chips industry, Marvell was founded in 1995 and quickly rose to become one of the leading fabless semiconductor companies. In addition to tech for disk drives, it develops chips found in a wide range of electronics, including broadband and wireless equipment, storage controllers, LCD displays, and TV set-top boxes.

The patents at issue in the current lawsuit involve inventions developed by CMU professor José Moura and former graduate student Alek Kavcic that allow hard disks to retrieve data accurately from platters spinning at high speeds, thanks to "noise-predictive technology."

Carnegie Mellon first brought suit against Marvell for unlawfully including the inventions in its chips in 2009. Between 2003 and 2012, the university says, the chipmaker shipped some 2.3 billion chips incorporating the technologies.

On Wednesday, the jury sided with CMU, finding that Marvell had infringed in every patent claim asserted by the university in the case.

In a statement, a CMU spokesperson said the university was "gratified" by the verdict in the four-week trial, adding that it did not undertake the suit lightly and that it was a "a hard fought battle every step of the way."

Marvell, on the other hand, disputed the jury's findings and says it will appeal the verdict. In a statement issued on Thursday, company reps reasserted that Marvell had infringed no CMU patents, going so far as to claim that "the theoretical methods described in these patents cannot practically be built in silicon even using the most advanced techniques available today, let alone with the technology available a decade ago."

According to Marvell, the specific techniques used in its chips, although superficially similar to the techniques described in the CMU patents, are actually based on in-house technology covered by Marvell's own patents.

Even if an appeals court finds in Marvell's favor, however, the company will likely not be off the hook. Large jury awards are often reduced on appeal, but even a smaller award could still leave Marvell with a record-setting judgment against it, should it be tripled due to the finding of willful infringement.

Investors do not seem optimistic. Marvell's shares fell by 10 per cent on the news and continued their decline on Thursday, shedding an additional 3.51 per cent to close at $7.14 per share, a new low. ®

What you need to know about cloud backup

Anonymous Coward

The cynic in me says "What did you expect"?

Trial in Pittsburgh.

Jury from Pittsburgh.

Plaintiff a major part of the Pittsburgh economy/ecosystem.

Defendant.... not from Pittsburgh.

Apple/Samsung all over again.

28
1
Anonymous Coward

Actual Value

It's hard to believe that a single component of a product could be worth 92% of the company that produces that product... and many other products as well. Or even that a single component would be worth ~%30 of the company's value. One component of hundreds or thousands involved. All these suits are a bit extreme, from my simple point of view.

19
1

I think those "freetards" to which you refer to feel the same way about the apparent disproportion in price (compared with vanilla DVD) as they do about the ridiculous cost of a downloaded (CD) album compared with a physical product (carrying with it all the costs of production, distribution and store overheads).

The premium attached is not justified.

15
1

More from The Register

 breaking news
Number of cops abusing Police National Computer access on the rise
Only a telegram from the Queen can get you off it
 breaking news
NSA whistleblower to tech firms, Obama: 'Grow a pair!'
Ed Snowden: Email tracking grabs 'IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything'
NSA: We COULD track you by your phone ... if we WANTED to
Honestly, too much work, can't be bothered
Google flings another £1m at online child sex abuse vid CRACKDOWN
See, see, we're trying, ad giant tells Daily Mail UK.gov
 breaking news
NSA PRISM-gate: Relax, GCHQ spooks 'keep us safe', says Cameron
Whatever they are up to, it's all above board, we're told
PRISM snitch claims NSA hacked Chinese targets since 2009
Snowden suddenly looks safer in Hong Kong after revelations
SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
US chief spook: Look, we only want to spy on 6.66 BEELLLION of you
Americans assured they are not in the NSA's sights