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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (78093)	11/1/1999 10:18:00 AM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1583492

Steve - Re: "I need to learn what is entailed by the expression "P6" bus which iNTEL is defending." The P6 bus protocol was introduced by Intel with the Pentium Pro, the first of the Intel 6th generation processor family. This was a split transaction bus that was a significant departure from the X86 bus that used data, address and control lines. The P6 bus is far superior to the X86 bus for multiprocessor use and use with large core to bus clock ratios. The P6 bus protocol is used in all members of the P6 family: Pentium Pro, Celeron, Pentium II, Pentium III, and Xeon. Re: "My next question is, does the Via KX133 violate iNTEL's P6? Is iNTEL trying to shutdown all PC133 memory usage?" Via signed a deal to obtain the P6 bus technology from Intel and surely agreed to pay for the use of the technology. Via then reneged on the deal. Discussions after the collapse of the deal probably went something like this. Intel - our P6 technology is protected by patents. Via - we stole it fair and square and there is nothing you do about it... We make the parts in Taiwan and you can not stop us there (true by the way). So Intel sued Via in the US and then sued customers who bought the Via parts, in the US and other countries where Intel had patent protection. On the surface, Intel is seeking to prevent the use of its patented technology by Via. One reason for the suits is that Intel wants to obtain a payment for use of its protected technology. Via is likely to learn the hard lesson that you can ignore intellectual property rights in Taiwan but you will have trouble when the products enter the global markets beyond Taiwan.

To: steve harris who wrote (78093)	11/1/1999 12:43:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1583492

Steve, Of course all the intellabees cry foul, poor little Intel, just protecting it's rights. And all the Amdonites say the opposite. Well VIA does have some kind of license so it is now a matter of interpretation of a licence through years of legal maneuverings. Since the license does exist I doubt that any peremptory relief will be given, so it is the stern chase for Intel. Now what does the AMD chip set do? also infringe?, or does AMD have a licanse? In that case I can see VIA partnering with AMD in dresden to make use of that license. As they say, the can, she is full of worms. Bill