Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey P who wrote (13210)	6/11/1999 4:58:00 PM
From: John Farrell	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 16960

Also, 3dfx probably couldn't sue until they had a chance to actually check out "Unified" which probably didn't happen until Creative actually shipped it with product which most likely just happened in the past few weeks. Once they could check the code (probably using a disassembler), they saw reason to believe that the actual Glide(TM) source code was used in some way as opposed to a "clean room" version of the API was developed by Creative without violating the licensing agreement. Creative was in a unique position of being a Glide licensee who now is a 3dfx competitor. It's obvious that Creative was hoping to use "Unified" to gain a competitive advantage over other card manufacturers so it should be interesting to see how this suit plays out. Since "Unified" is not required for Creative to ship product, I'd guess there would be an attempt for a quick injunction to bar Creative from shipping "Unified" until the suit is heard. Intellectual property is certainly a nebulous area of law. I don't see how anyone could view the suit as being weak by 3dfx as it is defending it's IP which all companies should do. -John