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 : IDTI - an IC Play on Growth Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LarryS who wrote (5936)	1/21/1998 10:39:00 PM
From: Rob S.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11555

CL has not threatened ALTR at this point - CL's sales are little more than zero. Altera is probably suffering more from general price pressures, maturation of some of the products their parts go into and design and inventory cycle issues not anything to do with CL this early in the game. Another company called Chip Merchant or something like that, already competes against ALTR and other programmable logic guys with laser programable fuse technology. What makes CL unique is that their shooting of the parts is from a bitstream emulation that duplicates ALTR's logic, timing, I/O and levels exactly - making the parts plug-and-play replacements rather than just equivalent re-designs. An article in the current Electronic Engineering Times describes the technology and questions whether Altera and Chip whatsitsname will sue for patent violations. I think that Altera is on weak ground to sue because the IP functionality progamed into a device is not patentable (at least by Altera) and that is what CL is duplicating, not ALTR's IC technology. Chip whatsit is a different matter. They reportedly have several patents that cover basic laser fuse and laser fuse enabled logic technologies. That could cause a problem unless CL has developed their own unique methods. CL is reportedly in the process of filing about 20 patents on their technology. Some of these are already filed. It is clear (pun intended) that CL has unique and likely patentable technology. what's not clear is how any litigation would settle out between these companies. I think CL will probably come out with good protection for their products but they may have to cross-license or pay minor royalties to Chip. This is a very guesswork like assessment - I have not seen any of the recent patent claims or discussed this with anyone who is familiar with them except for basic discussions with CL and IDT management. Techweb may have the article up.