Barry,
I think Palmer's reference to the WSJ article is simply to give this action some favorable PR spin.
All processor companies are "copying" those basic concepts of high-performance computers which have been around long enough so the patents have expired, and/or are offered via patent cross-licensing agreements [i.e., between the major developers]. This does not by itself imply anything about expropriation of the intellectual property of others. Also, many important concepts were never patented, but rather offered to all via published academic research.
Secondly, the very existence of Intel's large patent portfolio belies any claim that Intel was not innovating.
Therefore, Intel management's comments regarding needing to do more R&D probably was intended to indicate Intel now has to take the lead in developing major new technologies, not simply incrementally improve those which already exist.
Palmer realizes all this, so his comments are plainly disingenuous.
Palmer has been on thin ice in his position at DEC for some time, inasmuch as he has promised the board much and delivered little. This is almost certainly another act in his battle to retain control. If Palmer goes, I believe this lawsuit would be settled by his successor as one of said successor's first acts. Otherwise, Palmer may hold out until he gets something that will convince the board that his plans will now succeed. [If it drags on for as Intel could make it, Palmer will be gone before it goes to trial.]
IMHO
Best regards,
Arno |
