Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 47.14

-6.1%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (21492)	5/13/1997 1:12:00 PM
From: Barry A. Watzman	of 186894

>The DEC suit appears frivolous. If so, DEC could be subject to fines. There is no basis for presuming that this is frivolous. It could be very much non-frivolous. Just because the patents cover widely used areas of technology does not mean that DEC's way addressing them -- which they are claiming Intel copied -- are not unique and therefore valuable and protected by patent. Note, however, that if Intel could prove that the specific characteristics of DEC's invention that are the basis of the patent claim existed outside of DEC prior to DEC's patent application, then that would be grounds for voiding the patent. Indeed, if Intel concludes that they do infringe DEC's patent, and if they connot settle on agreeable terms, Intel's next line of defense will be to try and invalidate the patents. However it's not enough to prove, for example, that caching predates DEC's patents, it has to be proven that the specific approach to caching that are the basis of DEC's patent claims existed prior to DEC's patent application and were general knowledge.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next