dumbmoney,
It looks like all three of us may have been right, but I think you and Dan were more right than I was (two lawsuits, the first withdrawn on the same day, another filed later and still being fought).
Here's the first series of articles on the Intel/Via lawsuits (more to follow in a subsequent message):
Dave
--------------------------------
Via Technologies buys Pentium II core-logic license from Intel.
(Company Business and Marketing)
Electronic Engineering Times, Dec 7, 1998 p26(1)
Author
Carroll, Mark
Full Text
Taipei, Taiwan - In a move that lifts some of Taiwan's core logic for Pentium II systems from legal limbo, Via Technologies Inc. has reached a joint patent license agreement with Intel Corp. The move goes a long way toward resolving outstanding intellectual-property issues related to Via's chip sets.
Under the agreement, Intel has granted Via a patent license to manufacture and sell certain Apollo Pro chip sets that Via designed to operate with Intel's P6 bus microarchitecture. In exchange for the license, Via agreed to pay Intel royalties on the licensed products. Via also granted Intel a cross-license for use of Via's patents. Specific details of the companies' agreement remain confidential.
...
--------------------------------------------
Intel grants Pentium II chipset license.
(Company Business and Marketing)
Electronic Buyers' News, Dec 7, 1998 p4(1)
Author
Hachman, Mark; Chen, Sandy
Full Text
Ending months of speculation, Intel Corp. has granted its first license giving another company the rights to develop chipsets supporting Intel's closely guarded Pentium II microprocessors.
Under a restricted agreement, Taiwan's Via Technologies Inc. may build and sell specific core-logic chipsets incorporating the P6 bus, which connects to the Pentium II through the "Slot 1" connection. In exchange for the P6 patent license, Via must pay a per-unit royalty and will license certain undisclosed patents to Intel.
The agreement proves Intel's earlier contention that it would license the bus patents for "fair value." But analysts aren't sure whether similar deals will be signed by Acer Laboratories Inc. (ALI) and Silicon Integrated Systems Inc. (SiS), Via's primary competitors in the chipset market.
...
---------------------------------------
Intel withdraws lawsuit against Via, calling it a 'mistake'.
(Via Technologies)(Company Business and Marketing)(Brief Article)
Electronic Buyers' News, May 10, 1999 p8(1)
Author
Robertson, Jack
Full Text
Intel Corp. last week made a wrong move in filing a lawsuit against Via Technologies Inc., a Taiwanese core-logic chipset maker with which Intel has been in negotiations to resolve a dispute over the Taipei-based company's use of a license to build Slot 1 x86-compatible chipsets. Realizing its mistake, Intel quickly filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, according to a spokesman for the Santa Clara, Calif., company.
------------------------------------------------
Withdrawn Intel suit a mystery.
(Intel withdraws its lawsuit against Taiwan chipset maker Via Technologies)(Company Business and Marketing)
Electronic Buyers' News, May 24, 1999 p82
Author
Robertson, Jack
Full Text
Two weeks after Intel Corp. withdrew its lawsuit against Taiwanese chipset maker Via Technologies Inc., executives were still bitter about the action taken by the chip maker.
"I believe Intel is really worried, and the lawsuit was meant to intimidate us and perhaps OEM customers," said Dean Hays, Via's vice president of marketing, at the company's Fremont, Calif., location last week. "It was totally off base, because our Intel license definitely covers any Via chipset that might be of concern to Intel."
Intel had filed a breach-of-contract suit against Via, charging the Taipei-based company with trying to sell an unlicensed logic chipset, according to court documents filed in San Jose. On the same day the lawsuit was filed, Intel withdrew it, claiming it was was mistakenly filed by its outside counsel.
Intel's perplexing action came just after it had settled an antitrust case with the Federal Trade Commission over earlier licensing disputes with Compaq Computer Corp., the former Digital Equipment Corp., and Intergraph Corp.
Some industry observers wondered if Intel's admitted "mistake" in filing the Via lawsuit involved second thoughts on how this action might affect the just-concluded FTC settlement. A spokesman for Intel, Santa Clara, Calif., said there is no relationship between its licensing dispute with Via and the settlement with the FTC.
A copy of the withdrawn Via suit revealed that Intel wanted a restraining order against Via selling unspecified chipsets using Intel technology that allegedly had not been licensed to the Taiwanese company.
Hays claimed that all of Via's current and upcoming chipsets that connect to Intel's Celeron and Pentium processors are covered by the licensing agreement. Furthermore, he said Via's upcoming integrated chipset that uses Trident Microsystems' graphics-accelerator core and competes head on with Intel's integrated chipset, which also implements Trident's technology, are protected under the contract as well.
Hays speculated that Intel might be concerned with Via's imminent chipset designed to connect PC133 SDRAM with Intel processors, since Intel is doing all in its power to derail adoption of PC133 in favor of Direct Rambus DRAM.
The Intel spokesman said Hays was misinformed about chipsets covered by the licensing agreement. He declined to elaborate, however, claiming the licensing agreement was confidential.
The Intel complaint did not identify the specific Via chipsets in question, but the suit said Via "began in February and March, 1999, demonstrating the chipsets to OEMs and providing samples to OEMs for evaluation purposes, and informing OEMs that the chipsets would be available for delivery in the third quarter of 1999."
Copyright [copyright] 1999 CMP Media Inc.
Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 CMP Publications, Inc.
-------------------------------------------
Now Intel Sues Via, Revokes Chipset Licensing Agreement.
Computergram International, June 28, 1999 i3691 pNA
Full Text
Taiwanese chip design house VIA Technologies Inc, which has had a good deal of success getting memory manufacturers behind its PC133 SDRAM memory chip specification, has had a technology license from Intel Corp revoked, and now faces a federal lawsuit. Last Wednesday, Intel filed a breach of contract and patent infringement suit against Via.
Intel's lawsuit states that Via "continues to mislead customers...to believe that unlicensed Via chipset products are licensed to Intel." The license agreement between the two was signed last November, but revoked by Intel on June 18. While the complaint doesn't mention which chipset is the subject of the dispute, industry reports over the last few months suggest that PC133 is at the center of the issue. Intel first filed suit against Via back in May, but withdrew the action almost immediately, saying the filing was "an error."
Via is working on a chipset that will support PC-133 SDRAM memory, which it and others have positioned as an "evolutionary alternative" to Intel's proposed support for Direct Rambus memory. Rambus systems won't be available until Intel's delayed Camino chipset is ready later this year. Via is hoping to persuade PC manufacturers to adopt its chipsets to support systems that use a faster system bus than Intel can offer - 133MHz compared with 100MHz - and have faster memory - 133MHz rather than the 100MHz SDRAMs current Intel products support. Intel has said it won't use 133MHz SDRAMs, and has pitched Rambus memory as its alternative.
Intel, currently facing allegations of "bullying" from Intergraph Corp over RISC patents, may not be too keen to be portrayed in a similar role through new legal action. But rumors of further delays for Camino persist, despite Intel denials, with some reports claiming that the chipset will not ship in volume before year-end. At the Computex trade show in Taipai earlier this month, many motherboard manufacturers were showing systems using Via's current chipset, which has a 133MHz front-side bus but currently supports only 100MHz memory. Module makers such as Unigen Corp, Smart Modular Technologies Inc and Kingston Technology Co are all starting to produce PC133 dual in-line memory modules for OEMs.
-----------------------------------------------
VIA to buy Cyrix microprocessor unit (679).
China News, July 1, 1999 pCHNW5995828
Full Text
Firm hopes to use acquisitions to dodge lawsuit
VIA Technologies, one of the island's top two chipset makers, has just signed a letter of intent to acquire National Semiconductor's Cyrix x86 microprocessor unit in what the Taiwan company says is a bid to secure its future in low-cost, system-on-a-chip or multifunctional microchip production.
The details of the deal will be released on either Monday or Tuesday but industry sources speculate that VIA will put down about US$175 million for Cyrix's research and development as well as marketing. The chipset maker may get the sum from the NT$10 billion in additional capital it is reportedly planning to raise by the second half of the year. It confirmed yesterday that it is bidding also for National's silicon wafer plant or fab in South Portland, Maine.
VIA sees the acquisition as a means to get around a patent infringement lawsuit that gargantuan competitor Intel filed against it last week in San Jose, California. Cyrix holds several technology patent licenses to produce Celeron-level microchips. Intel, however, has said any cross-licensing arrangement with National will not apply to VIA.
In a show of grit, VIA said it would continue promoting a 133-MegaHertz (MHz) chipset front side bus. This product has incurred Intel's ire for its threat to cut into Intel's market dominance with a speed that is 33 percent faster than its own comparable product.
"We are not afraid to compete directly with Intel. We have had many fights with Intel before," said Ted Lee, sales and marketing chief at VIA. "Despite the tough competition with Intel, we will continue to develop the Cyrix line."
Lee hoped the deal would bump up VIA's earnings to NT$5.2 per share from an original projection of NT$5.03. He added that the company's sales target is still NT$8.5 billion, a rather conservative figure set against estimates of over NT$9.2 billion by investment houses such as Daiwa Securities.
National, for its part, is intent on quitting the microprocessor business, except for the more profitable MediaGX line of special-application central processing units (CPUs). It has negotiated with Taiwan foundries United Microelectronics Corp. (UMC) and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. for the sale of a majority interest in its fab.
A UMC official said his company is not interested in the fab because it is "not fully automated" and will require additional capital spending for an upgrade. But securities industry analysts said the fab does not lag behind technologically since it can turn out more efficient 0.18 micron wafers.
VIA's announcement caused quite a stir in the local stock market and electronics industry. Its share, for instance, jumped yesterday to the seven percent daily limit, up NT$14 to NT$214.
Alfred Ying, vice president of securities house Peregrine Primasia, said Intel's cancellation of its P6 license has left the Taiwan manufacturer with no other choice but to try to acquire it through the purchase of Cyrix. He thinks VIA's is "the right move."
A ranking official of its major local rival, Silicon Integrated Systems (SIS) Corp., however, doubts that a chipset maker of its size can take on Intel in the manufacture of microprocessors or in the race to delivering chipsets to market.
"It doesn't make sense. Once we sign an agreement with Intel, we'll follow the agreement," he said. SIS plans to ship its 133 MHz chipset toward the end of the third quarter, around the same time as its technology license provider Intel.
The imminent sale of Cyrix will leave only one other notable CPU maker to challenge Intel, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). AMD is also hurting from a protracted price war with its giant rival.
Copyright 1999: China News. All Rights Reserved.
Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 Financial Times Business Information
---------------------------------------------------
Legal issues test support for Via chips.
(Via Technologies)(Company Business and Marketing)
Electronic Buyers' News, July 5, 1999 p5
Author
Hachman, Mark
Full Text
Silicon Valley- Armed with newly acquired microprocessor patents from Cyrix Corp. and backed by big business in Taiwan, chipset maker Via Technologies Inc. now seems ready to duel with Intel Corp. in earnest.
The Taipei-based company, whose core-logic IC strategy offers a much-anticipated alternative to Intel's Camino/Rambus roadmap, is honing its edge in a bid to take on the low end of the PC-processor market.
But observers and OEMs pointed to what could be a gaping hole in Via's strategy-namely, the uncertainty surrounding its legal ability to manufacture both Cyrix processors and their supporting chipsets. And with such a fundamental question unanswered, customers indicate they may be unwilling to back the challenger. In an interview with EBN, Wen Chi Chen, Via's chief executive, said the company will clarify its position later this week.
Via girded itself for battle late last month, when Intel filed a lawsuit in a San Jose federal court challenging the upstart IC maker's promotion of forthcoming P6-class chipsets. The suit claimed that Via violated terms of the agreement by marketing chipsets not covered in the Intel license-including a device incorporating Intel's 133-MHz frontside bus. In a recently issued statement, Via said it has taken "the necessary legal action to protect its rights."
Observers viewed Via's acquisition of National Semiconductor Corp.'s Cyrix subsidiary last week as a defensive move, because National has a separate and pre-existing license to Intel's P6 architecture. By absorbing Cyrix, it is believed, Via can sidestep additional charges of the kind Intel has laid out in its lawsuit: patent infringement, breach of contract, false advertising, and unfair competition.
However, some of Via's customers say the move, while bold, is risky because it flirts with one of the industry's more closely guarded secrets by pressing the issue of exactly what products may be designed and manufactured under the patent-licensing agreements Intel strikes with its competitors.
The concern stems from the precedent Intel has already set in dealing with Via's disputed chipsets. Intel is challenging Via's forthcoming Apollo Pro+133, an unlicensed chipset that Via was allegedly sampling in violation of its licensing terms. Intel has since revoked Via's P6 license entirely. Via executives in recent weeks have clarified their own public position, acknowledging that chipsets using a 133-MHz frontside bus or 4X AGP connection are not in fact licensed by Intel.
However, Intel didn't stop there. The Santa Clara, Calif., chip giant is also trying to quash Via's use of fabs owned by National. In a letter to Via's customers that preceded the court filing, Intel alleged that, contrary to Via's claim, it is not entitled to piggyback National's own license with Intel to manufacture 133-MHz frontside-bus chipsets.
"But without knowing the terms of the agreement, we don't actually know if that's true or not," said analyst Dean McCarron at Mercury Research, Scottsdale, Ariz.
Several sources said Via plans to sign a deal with National under which the IC maker would manufacture and sell chipsets-and perhaps microprocessors-designed by Via, but under National's name or a co-branding arrangement. In return, National would receive cash or royalty payments from the sale of the chipsets, sources said.
Reached at Via's U.S. headquarters in Fremont, Calif., Chen said he could not comment on the matter because of Intel's pending lawsuit.
Although Via must still work around the P6 bus licensing issue, history has proven that manufacturing x86 microprocessors at a licensed foundry has been tolerated by Intel. But the lawsuit may provoke a different response, and has observers wondering whether Intel will extend its prohibition of Via's use of third-party foundries to include the company's newly acquired Cyrix microprocessors.
"If the question is, does the [National] license attach itself to Cyrix when Cyrix gets sold, then the rule of thumb is no," said a spokesman for Intel, who declined to comment on the specifics of the licensing agreement.
Terms of the Cyrix sale were not disclosed, but a National spokesman said they involve neither the x86-patent license National signed with Intel in 1976, nor National's production fab in South Portland, Maine.4
For now, both Cyrix and Via are publicly asking OEMs to take Via's ability to manufacture both chipsets and microprocessors on faith alone.
National does not have the right to sell its x86 license, but there are other, undisclosed alternatives, Cyrix officials said. "We'll be doing due diligence in the next month," said Stan Swearingen, vice president of stand-alone microprocessor marketing at Cyrix, Richardson, Texas. "We believe we have a bulletproof method to handle the [intellectual-property issue]."
However, the doubt surrounding Via's legal position has created cause for concern, said an executive at one of the company's motherboard customers. "I don't think we've stopped buying chipsets from Via, but we've paused to evaluate the situation," he said.
Under the terms of Via's purchase, the Cyrix team will remain in Texas probably as a Via subsidiary, according to Swearingen. An IPO is planned in either Taiwan or the United States to raise capital and retain the design team, he said.
In the end, Via's role as part of the Formosa Group, a large Asian conglomerate Swearingen referred to as the "General Electric of Taiwan," made the difference. "Everything's shifting to Taiwan," Swearingen said. Via's own stock price in Taiwan has climbed sharply since its own IPO, providing it with additional capital resources, he added.
As a former marketing executive for National's integrated MediaGX processor, Swearingen said he has considered whether Via's new subsidiary would design similar integrated products that combine a chipset and microprocessor core. Discussions in this area have not been finalized, but the initial customer response has been negative, he said. Customers are more concerned with the total price of the system and its form factor than with whether it's one chip or 10, Swearingen said.
"A lot of the top-tier CTOs believe in two-chip partitioning," he said. "But we have the wherewithal to do one hellacious single-chip solution."
Swearingen said Cyrix plans to sample its Socket 370 Gobi processor in four weeks, with production in time for the holidays. The Mojave core will ship in the 2000 holiday season, he added. -Additional reporting by Sandy Chen.
---
Via/Cyrix vs. Intel
- Intel files suit against Via charging it breached terms of chipset license
- Via vows to defend itself while clarifying its legal position
- Via buys Cyrix from National, promises "bulletproof" scheme to satisfy license issue
Copyright [copyright] 1999 CMP Media Inc.
Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 CMP Publications, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------
Non-Negotiable: Talks did not pan out -- Intel Files Suit Against Via, Alleging Breach Of Contract.
(Via Technologies)(Company Business and Marketing)(Brief Article)
Computer Reseller News, July 5, 1999 p101
Author
Savage, Marcia
Full Text
Santa Clara, Calif. - Intel Corp. filed a federal lawsuit alleging patent infringement, breach of contract and unfair competition against chipset maker Via Technologies Inc.
The suit, filed June 23, comes after Intel terminated its licensing agreement with Via on June 18. An Intel spokesman said the company, based here, filed suit after months of negotiations with Via about compliance with the licensing agreement, which granted Via use of Intel's patented technology to make and sell certain chipsets.
"We tried to resolve it amicably, but unfortunately, they weren't willing to live up to the terms of the agreement they signed last November," the spokesman said.
Taiwan-based Via could not be reached for comment.
The suit alleges that in February or March Via began making and marketing chipsets that use Intel patented technology but are not licensed under the terms of the agreement. Via misled OEMs and others to believe the chipsets were licensed, according to Intel.
The lawsuit does not cite specific Via products that violate the Intel agreement, and the Intel spokesman declined to elaborate.
Intel filed the suit in order to protect its intellectual property but also to enforce its licenses so as to prevent confusion in the marketplace, he said. He said Intel put Via on notice more than two months ago that it would cancel the agreement if Via did not remedy the situation.
Intel initially filed a breach-of-contract suit against Via in April but withdrew it because of a clerical error by an outside law firm, the spokesman said.
In its federal suit this week, Intel seeks an injunction against Via's conduct, as well as unspecified damages.
Earlier this year, Via helped form an industry group that worked to develop standards for a faster memory technology, 133MHz SDRAM. Intel has not supported that technology, called PC133, and instead remains steadfast behind an alternative memory technology by Rambus Inc.
The Lawsuit Basics:
- Intel alleges Via was making chipsets using Intel patented technology that Via had not licensed.
- Alleges patent infringement, breach of contract and unfair competition.
Copyright (c) 1999 CMP Media Inc.
Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 CMP Publications, Inc.
-------------------------------------------------
VIA Signs National to Build Chipset : Move attempts to circumvent lawsuit by Intel.
(Company Business and Marketing)
Electronic News (1991), July 12, 1999 v45 i28 p1
Author
Brown, Peter
Full Text
San Jose-Mighty Intel Corp. may be thwarted by a mere logo.
When VIA Technologies Inc. last week signed National Semiconductor Corp. to manufacture its chipsets, the Taiwanese company was attempting to make an end-run around Intel, which has sued VIA to stop it from making Intel-compatible chipsets.
VIA contends that Santa Clara, Calif.-based National is permitted to build its chipsets, because when National acquired Fairchild Semiconductor in 1987, it gained a cross-licensing arrangement covering Intel patents for most x86 processors.
"We do not believe National's license allows them to serve as a foundry," disputed Chuck Malloy, an Intel spokesman.
But a loophole may exist that will give VIA and National what they want. According to National spokesman Bill Callahan, when National and Intel renegotiated their cross-licensing agreement a few years ago, there was indeed a clause that prohibited National from making chips on a foundry basis using Intel's patents. However, the agreement also stated that National did have the right to use the Intel technology if it was making the products for itself and would brand the product with the National logo.
According to Callahan, the chipsets that will be made in National fabs will have both National's logo and Via's. So the question really is, can National make the parts using both logos and not violate the cross-licensing agreement?
"If (Intel) wants to stop them from making (chipsets), they will have to come after us," said National spokesman Bill Callahan. "We believe we are covered by our cross-licensing agreement that allows us to manufacture these parts. Intel may see it a different way."
"They certainly aren't rolling over and playing dead just because Intel filed a lawsuit," said Scott Hudson, senior analyst at Cahners In-Stat Group, Scottsdale, Ariz.
The outcome of the dispute could also be critical to the fortunes of Advanced Micro Devices Inc., which needs a viable source of chipsets for its microprocessors. It also could determine whether PC-133 will succeed as an alternative to Direct Rambus DRAM, as Intel has yet to commit to building chipsets that work with PC-133.
Marc Brown, computer law specialist and law partner at Oppenhemier, Wolff & Donnelly, said the courts often take a broad view of such arrangements. "Sometimes in a cross-licensing agreement if you go so far and then step over the line, the courts will let them go a little further than the original agreement," said Brown. "Even if National has stepped across that line, will the law enforce it? They may just give (National) a warning."
Peter Glaskowsky, senior analyst at MicroDesign Resources, a microprocessor analyst firm, said Intel would be better off just leaving the whole situation alone if it boiled down to whose logo is on the chipsets.
"It's better for Intel to not pursue this if there is anything talked about logos," said Glaskowsky. "There are more important things to worry about than just losing a few percent points of market share to VIA, who is relatively harmless to the giant company."
Intel apparently feels differently. Intel's recent lawsuit against VIA alleged VIA violated its licensing pact with Intel for three months, Malloy said.
Intel has not said whether it plans to include National in the lawsuit. However, if Intel can get an injunction against VIA, then the argument over chipsets and next generation main memory may be moot. The long legal battles and courtroom costs could tie VIA's hands for months or years.
In a statement made jointly by VIA and National, the firms said, "This alliance is for VIA to continue to develop and market VIA's chipset which offers the advantages of a 133MHz front-side bus, PC-133 SDRAM, and AGP 4X compatibility."
VIA said the PC-133 chipset would be used in Pentium II-type processor-based PCs, and National said it would take three to four months for the company to get the chipsets ready for production. The agreement does not include building Cyrix processors, that VIA bought last month, and National said there has been no decision made whether it will build them for VIA.
Chad Fasca contributed to this article.
Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 Cahners Publishing Company
----------------------------------------------
VIA Looks for World Domination With TSMC.
(Company Business and Marketing)(Brief Article)
Computergram International, July 15, 1999 pNA
Full Text
VIA Technologies Inc hopes that it will that it will become the world's largest fabless IC designer within two years through a link up with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. The Taiwanese chip design house is aiming to capture 10% of the global market and become the world's second largest CPU manufacturer, earning operating revenues of $1bn in the process. It intends to strike a foundry deal with TSMC after the completion of its acquisition of National Semiconductor Inc's Cyrix x86 unit.
However, two obstacles stand in the way of VIA's global ambitions. First, Intel Corp will try to block VIA's access to the Natsemi's x86 license, which is presumably key to VIA's plans especially if hopes to make its revenues in the low-end of the CPU market. Intel has already taken out a patent lawsuit against VIA and has said that the company's deal with Natsemi won't allow it access to the patent. Second, the VP of TSMC told the Taiwan Commercial Times that "this news is VIA's alone" and he had no comment to make on any prospective foundry deal. |
