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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (171566)	10/11/2002 4:35:12 PM
From: NITT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

re:"This I'd like to know more about. You're saying AMD, Transmeta etc. can merely get a IA-64 license from Intergraph and develop a IA-64 chip?" Hell no is the simple answer. We are talking about violating some patents for the way Intel implemented some of its hardware, not a patent on the Itanium's overall design. If Intel decides not for fight anymore, or if they loss the appeal, Intel could pay the settlement, plus the $100M license fees, or they could redesign the offending portion of the CPU... $100M may actually be the cheaper alternative since the Texas court need to approve any redesign. Any efforts to copy IA64 would be subject to patents and copyrights Intel may have... it would also be subject to any existing cross license agreements that might cover some or all of the IP. I'm not sure if AMD's cross license extends to the 64bit stuff... I thing it doesn't. The real problem for AMD or anyone else who chooses to copy Itanium will is that they will probably get tied up on the bus interface patents. The easiest way to sell parts would be with a socket compatible part, but it also could be the most defendable area for Intel. BTW, I think Dan was just trying to get a rise out of people with his usual BS. Nitt