News German court issues injunction against sales of select Intel CPUs

[Admin]

German court bans sales of Intel's Ice Lake, Tiger Lake, and Alder Lake processors in Germany.

German court issues injunction against sales of select Intel CPUs : Read more

 

[cyrusfox]

What a wild ride, if already invalidated why do European Courts go along with the Charade...

 

[derekullo]

The first thing to come to mind of a trial in Düsseldorf ...

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

What a wild ride, if already invalidated why do European Courts go along with the Charade...

Because it's a easy way to put screws to Intel.

One is a EU company, the other is a US company.

It's obvious which side the EU will favor, the one where the company is clearly part of the EU.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Because it's a easy way to put screws to Intel.

One is a EU company, the other is a US company.

It's obvious which side the EU will favor, the one where the company is clearly part of the EU.

The plaintiff, R2 Semiconductor, is a US-based company. Literally the first sentence of this article says as much...

 

[TJ Hooker]

What a wild ride, if already invalidated why do European Courts go along with the Charade...

Intel claims the patent has been invalidated in the US. Even if that's true, maybe that doesn't automatically invalidate it everywhere? But I won't pretend to be knowledgeable on international intellectual property law.

 

[Chung Leong]

Intel claims the patent has been invalidated in the US. Even if that's true, maybe that doesn't automatically invalidate it everywhere? But I won't pretend to be knowledgeable on international intellectual property law.

A rejection of an application in the home country would automatically cancel pending applications in all other countries, I believe. Invalidation is different legally.

 

[bit_user]

I think the import ban + recall sounds way too drastic. The plaintiff should only be allowed to demand damages comparable to standard licensing fees + punitive damages (which I'm not sure exist as a concept, in Germany's legal system).

The ability to impose an import ban + recall of unsold inventory would seem to make the system too ripe for abuse (i.e. extortion). As the Gen 13 and Meteor Lake products have shown, it's not as if the technology at issue was fundamental to the product - Intel can still build these CPUs without the allegedly infringing tech, nor is Intel's use of it depriving the plaintiff of any market share or opportunities by doing so.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

The plaintiff, R2 Semiconductor, is a US-based company. Literally the first sentence of this article says as much...

Fair enough, misread that part.

Then the EU just wants to screw over Intel because they're the Dominant player in CPU's

 

[bit_user]

Then the EU just wants to screw over Intel because they're the Dominant player in CPU's

Why does this event have to rely on some sort of conspiracy? Maybe the particular details of the court case just happened to go against Intel. Honestly, I worry about you, sometimes.

I'm no expert on German jurisprudence, but I expect their court system is well-isolated from political interference. Remember: this isn't a case of the German government or EU suing Intel, this is a case between two private parties. So, this turn of events really shouldn't be taken as any kind of government policy or government position regarding Intel.

On the contrary, recent German subsidies for Intel manufacturing facilities can and should be taken as a sign of Germany's relations with Intel:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-tsmc-germany-fabs-subsidies
​

 

[JTWrenn]

A rejection of an application in the home country would automatically cancel pending applications in all other countries, I believe. Invalidation is different legally.

I believe the only difference between a rejection and an invalidation is timing. ie it was found to be improper in some way and rejected after being issues, vs rejected before being issues.


That being said I don't believe one country invalidating a patent does anything at all for other countries.

 

[thestryker]

Seems like the question would be why move forward with an injunction now (instead of making it pending patent trial outcome) when the patent has already been invalidated in the US and is in court to be invalidated in Germany.

What a wild ride, if already invalidated why do European Courts go along with the Charade...

Since Intel is seeking to have it invalidated in the German patent court it looks like one court simply moves faster than the other.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Why does this event have to rely on some sort of conspiracy? Maybe the particular details of the court case just happened to go against Intel. Honestly, I worry about you, sometimes.

Because Politics almost always seems to interfere with court cases in the modern era.

I'm no expert on German jurisprudence, but I expect their court system is well-isolated from political interference. Remember: this isn't a case of the German government or EU suing Intel, this is a case between two private parties. So, this turn of events really shouldn't be taken as any kind of government policy or government position regarding Intel.

Not everybody in the German/EU government likes Intel, some do; some have a vendetta/grudge against them do to their Monopoly Status / #1 seat in the CPU / Foundary business.

On the contrary, recent German subsidies for Intel manufacturing facilities can and should be taken as a sign of Germany's relations with Intel:

​

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-tsmc-germany-fabs-subsidies​

​

That's Germany looking out for it's citizens by giving them high tech jobs in the future.

It just happens to benefit Intel because they are a "Necessary Evil".

 

[bit_user]

Because Politics almost always seems to interfere with court cases in the modern era.

Again, it's a lawsuit between private parties. Unless you have specific evidence of undue influence in the court proceedings, you shouldn't make such allegations.

 

[Neilbob]

I'm a little confused. Even if this whole thing with R2 has less oomph than someone farting in the wind, how would Raptor Lake not be subject to the so-called patent infringement when, from all I've seen, that processor is little more than Alder Lake with more dinky cores and higher clock speeds?

R2 Semiconductor Inc isn't even large enough to have a Wikipedia page...

 

[-Fran-]

I wonder what would Intel do if someone was to create an X87-ISA-compliant CPU?

Yeah, yeah. Nuance and all that. This is Big Corpo talking valid points when it suits them, do not forget. I actually laughed at the "...should not be allowed to obtain injunctions on CPUs and other critical components at the expense of consumers, workers, national security, and the economy". How can they even say that with a straight face, LOL.

Something, something, re-do the Patents/Copyrights system, something, something.

Regards.

 

[PEnns]

Because it's a easy way to put screws to Intel.

One is a EU company, the other is a US company.

It's obvious which side the EU will favor, the one where the company is clearly part of the EU.

You may want to read the article again.

Both are US companies.

 

[Chung Leong]

I believe the only difference between a rejection and an invalidation is timing. ie it was found to be improper in some way and rejected after being issues, vs rejected before being issues.

Between "before" and "after" is a whole world of difference. Invalidation of a patent is property deprivation. That can't happen without due process of law.

 

[ingtar33]

What a wild ride, if already invalidated why do European Courts go along with the Charade...

because the EU courts have a tendency to use fines on business to raise tax $$ for the EU. they tend to favor complainants and rarely award the complainant financial compensation, rather they tend to rule for "fines" which means the money goes to the EU not the harmed party.

 

[JTWrenn]

Between "before" and "after" is a whole world of difference. Invalidation of a patent is property deprivation. That can't happen without due process of law.

Not sure what your point is here. Invalidation has a process to happen in the first place. Also, what does the process of invalidation have to do with whether a foreign country will abide by it? The only question between invalidation and rejection in this current situation is how it effects patents in foreign countries from the original patent filing. I can't find any reason to think either really matter. You could fail to get a patent in one country and get one in another. You could also have a patent in 2 countries and have one rescind that patent.

We haven't talked about the process of invalidation so...not sure what you are talking about there.

 

[TJ Hooker]

because the EU courts have a tendency to use fines on business to raise tax $$ for the EU. they tend to favor complainants and rarely award the complainant financial compensation, rather they tend to rule for "fines" which means the money goes to the EU not the harmed party.

Do you have a source with an example of one private company suing another in the EU, and the result being that the defendent has to pay the government (not the plaintiff) a fine?

 

[TerryLaze]

Do you have a source with an example of one private company suing another in the EU, and the result being that the defendent has to pay the government (not the plaintiff) a fine?

Yeah amd vs intel was exactly that, in the US intel paid amd in a settlement out of court while in the EU they paid the fine to the EU.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-wins-billion-dollar-appeal

Fines

Fines

competition-policy.ec.europa.eu

Fines imposed on undertakings found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU budget.

 

[thestryker]

Yeah amd vs intel was exactly that, in the US intel paid amd in a settlement out of court while in the EU they paid the fine to the EU.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-wins-billion-dollar-appeal

Fines

Fines

competition-policy.ec.europa.eu

Uh... read the article? The EU was going after Intel for actions they'd taken. That is not AMD suing Intel in the EU.

 

[TerryLaze]

Uh... read the article? The EU was going after Intel for actions they'd taken. That is not AMD suing Intel in the EU.

Where did I say that AMD went after intel in the EU?!

 

[thestryker]

Where did I say that AMD went after intel in the EU?!

The person you quoted literally said that... and this was your response...