or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Patent infringement suit targets Apple over use of Intel CPUs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Patent infringement suit targets Apple over use of Intel CPUs

post #1 of 65
Thread Starter 
Apple, Intel and Hewlett-Packard have all been hit with a new patent infringement lawsuit that takes issue with Apple's iMac and its use of Intel processors.

The lawsuit was filed this week by X2Y Attenuators, LLC, based out of Erie, Penn. X2Y has asserted that Apple's 27-inch iMac, utilizing a 3.2Ghz Intel Core i3 processor, is in violation of five patents it has registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The inventions are U.S. Patent Nos:
6,738,249 Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,110,227: Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,609,500: Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,733,621: Energy conditioning circuit arrangement for integrated circuit
7,916,444: Arrangement for energy conditioning
Apple's 27-inch Core i3 iMac, model No. A1312, is accused of violating all five patents in the lawsuit. But X2Y also broadens its position in the complaint, citing the desktop as "one such personal computer" made by Apple that it believes violates those patents.

X2Y's complaint also specifically cites HP's TouchSmart 610 Series PC as a computer made by HP alleged to be in violation of the five patents. And it also singles out Intel's Core i7-950 3.06Ghz LGA1366 Desktop Processor.

X2Y's complaint was filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in the Western District of Pennsylvania. The company asserts that the alleged infringement by Apple, Intel and HP, without proper licensing of the five patents, has caused X2Y to suffer monetary damages.



The plaintiff seeks to recoup those damages, along with interest, and has asked the court to prevent the three companies from continuing to sell products it believes are in violation of its patents.

The official site for X2y Attenuators notes that it is an intellectual property company that develops "advanced passive component solutions for the electronics industry." It says that the business is "dedicated to helping companies identify applications where X2y components can improve circuit performance and save money."
post #2 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple, Intel and Hewlett-Packard have all been hit with a new patent infringement lawsuit that takes issue with Apple's iMac and its use of Intel processors.

The lawsuit was filed this week by X2Y Attenuators, LLC, based out of Erie, Penn. X2Y has asserted that Apple's 27-inch iMac, utilizing a 3.2Ghz Intel Core i3 processor, is in violation of five patents it has registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The inventions are U.S. Patent Nos:
6,738,249 Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,110,227: Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,609,500: Universal energy conditioning interposer with circuit architecture
7,733,621: Energy conditioning circuit arrangement for integrated circuit
7,916,444: Arrangement for energy conditioning
Apple's 27-inch Core i3 iMac, model No. A1312, is accused of violating all five patents in the lawsuit. But X2Y also broadens its position in the complaint, citing the desktop as "one such personal computer" made by Apple that it believes violates those patents.

X2Y's complaint also specifically cites HP's TouchSmart 610 Series PC as a computer made by HP alleged to be in violation of the five patents. And it also singles out Intel's Core i7-950 3.06Ghz LGA1366 Desktop Processor.

X2Y's complaint was filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in the Western District of Pennsylvania. The company asserts that the alleged infringement by Apple, Intel and HP, without proper licensing of the five patents, has caused X2Y to suffer monetary damages.



The plaintiff seeks to recoup those damages, along with interest, and has asked the court to prevent the three companies from continuing to sell products it believes are in violation of its patents.

The official site for X2y Attenuators notes that it is an intellectual property company that develops "advanced passive component solutions for the electronics industry." It says that the business is "dedicated to helping companies identify applications where X2y components can improve circuit performance and save money."

Good Gravy! Enough already!!

Apple sues Samsung. Samsung sues Apple. Apple sues HTC. Lodsys sues app developers. Nokia sues Apple. Apple sues Nokia. . .

And on and on. Does anyone here really think these patent suits help develop technologies or add to the bottom line of anyone but lawyers? IMO, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Samsung, HTC and a few other big players should all agree to sit down and form a group that agrees not to sue each other, work things out within the group as needed, and to share patents to keep others at bay to avoid patent infringement claims against other group members.

Or just keep things as they are, using the courts to win in the marketplace. This is beyond asinine IMO.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #3 of 65
I don't get it, shouldn't the manufacturer of the Core i3 processor be sued instead?
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #4 of 65
I'm getting sick of these patent trolls already.
post #5 of 65
At this it is a hardware patent
post #6 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IMO, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Samsung, HTC and a few other big players should all agree to sit down and form a group that agrees not to sue each other, work things out within the group as needed...

That is what they do (discuss) and when that fails they bring suit in front of the court.
post #7 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Does anyone here really think these patent suits help develop technologies or add to the bottom line of anyone but lawyers?

Don't blame the lawsuits, blame the U.S. Government for approving these vague, logical conclusion tech patents in the first place!
post #8 of 65
The only way to get ahead is to point fingers at the other guy. You cant even build a better mouse trap because chances are somebody already made a patent for it but is too much of a loser to market it properly. Instead they'll just sue you for being smarter.
post #9 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

I'm getting sick of these patent trolls already.

You're getting sick of it because these tech sites find it necessary to post every story about it.
post #10 of 65
Seriously, You can't build anything without someone calling infringement. And the suing crap has got to stop.
post #11 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by railstop View Post

Seriously, You can't build anything without someone calling infringement. And the suing crap has got to stop.

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
- Shakespeare (Henry VI)

(You'd think someone would have gone and DONE it by now. Geez.)
post #12 of 65
Tort Reform, if the company suing loses, they pay bigtime. that would slow this crap down.
post #13 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by normang View Post

Tort Reform, if the company suing loses, they pay bigtime. that would slow this crap down.

Great idea. This should definitely be done. Getting sick of all the effing patent trolls out there. It's getting ridiculous.
post #14 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by normang View Post

Tort Reform, if the company suing loses, they pay bigtime. that would slow this crap down.


Write your local Democrat to get on board with the Republicans, who have been touting tort reform for years, and let's get this done!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #15 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamdeadfish View Post

Don't blame the lawsuits, blame the U.S. Government for approving these vague, logical conclusion tech patents in the first place!

The strange thing is that all other tech companies can copy apple stuff and get away with it. All smartphones today are Iphone clones. All tablets are Ipad clones.

When Steve introduced Iphone he said that Apple had over 200 patent on the Iphone. How can Samsung make exact copies of it?
post #16 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IMO, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Samsung, HTC and a few other big players should all agree to sit down and form a group that agrees not to sue each other.....

The problem is that, as the article notes, X2y Attenuators is an "intellectual property" company that produces nothing. Same with Lodsys. As such, their only reason for existence is "licensing" and/or suing other companies. There are thousands of them out there, hidden in the woodwork like cockroaches.

Hell, Lodsys was created and staffed SOLELY to hunt down companies that "violate" their patent. The company is a shell. It has no assets. There's nothing to countersue. Try to sue them for bringing frivolous lawsuits, and the "company" simply disappears into thin air, like smoke.

The entire system needs to be reformed, if not totally eliminated...
post #17 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Write your local Democrat to get on board with the Republicans, who have been touting tort reform for years, and let's get this done!
/
/
/

US should be more nationalistic.
All patent cases with US companies against non US companies = US companies automatically win
post #18 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I don't get it, shouldn't the manufacturer of the Core i3 processor be sued instead?

Believe that would be Intel and they were included.

That said, these patents sound rather broad and could likely apply to a number of chips etc. Which means this reeks of "we waited until someone was making a ton of money that we could try to grab some of". That's also likely why they included HP and Apple.

With luck this will be tossed as the trolling it appears to be. And with it, the case law continues to negate the notion of broad idea patents


Quote:
Originally Posted by normang View Post

Tort Reform, if the company suing loses, they pay bigtime. that would slow this crap down.

Hell just make them pay all the court and lawyer fees. That can be enough to sting.

Also, a major reform for patents that we need is to take a page from trademarks. If someone violates your mark and you do nothing it is deemed that you don't give a shit and you essentially void your own trademark. They should do the same with patents. no more of this waiting for the offender to make money. you see something that is a possible violation you have to speak up right away (right away being defined as say 3 months from the announcement/release of the thing that is a potential offense) or you lose the right to ever do so. After all patents are supposed to be about protecting inventions, not making money

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #19 of 65
Um.....
If it is the Intel CPU that is infringing on the patents, why are they suing Apple?
post #20 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Um.....
If it is the Intel CPU that is infringing on the patents, why are they suing Apple?

It is just like the app developers being sued by Lodsys(?) except in this case, Intel did not complete some license agreement let alone one that passes to anyone using the technology. This is assuming the patents and interpretation of the infringement is correct......
post #21 of 65
Coming Soon: Ford sues Ferrari over their use of the Internal Combustion engine.
post #22 of 65
Oh well, I guess buttered bread has been around longer than me. I'll have to think of something else.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #23 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post

Coming Soon: Ford sues Ferrari over their use of the Internal Combustion engine.

Think you need to read up on the internal combustion engine if you think Ford invented it....
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons.
by Popular Mechanics
Reply
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons.
by Popular Mechanics
Reply
post #24 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by normang View Post

Tort Reform, if the company suing loses, they pay bigtime. that would slow this crap down.

Here's the problem: Congress is essentially made up of lawyers. Lawyers get paid regardless of which side they're on in a lawsuit. Ergo..
post #25 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


And on and on. Does anyone here really think these patent suits help develop technologies or add to the bottom line of anyone but lawyers? IMO, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Samsung, HTC and a few other big players should all agree to sit down and form a group that agrees not to sue each other, work things out within the group as needed, and to share patents to keep others at bay to avoid patent infringement claims against other group members.

actually they are all investors in the biggest patent troll of all, Intellectual Ventures
post #26 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Um.....
If it is the Intel CPU that is infringing on the patents, why are they suing Apple?

Because that's where pockets run deepest. Apple is the Marianas Trench of deep pockets. Patent trolls have to start there if they are looking for a payday.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #27 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Write your local Democrat to get on board with the Republicans, who have been touting tort reform for years, and let's get this done!

Ummm.... the Republican idea of "reform" is preventing or even eliminating class action lawsuits, and capping damages. Take a peek at the following:

"The Tennessee General Assembly approved HB 2008 that places a cap of $750,000 on non-economic damages such as pain and emotional suffering and a $500,000 cap on economic or punitive damages. The bill also places a $1 million cap on catastrophic cases, a cap that would apply in instances where a person became paralyzed, burned, blinded, suffered an amputation or otherwise died leaving behind minor children."

"The bill was Haslams legislative centerpiece in his first year in office and part of his campaign promise to make Tennessee more attractive to businesses."

Now read the end of the last line again, "....to make Tennessee more attractive to businesses."

Bingo. To Republicans, "tort reform" would be like the bankruptcy "reform" laws passed recently, choked full of rules benefitting the banks and the credit card industry. Tort reform would be little more than a corporate wish list, designed to make life easier and less expensive for them.

It would not benefit the public in any way, shape, or form.
post #28 of 65
These are "published" here because they generate page views. Not because they are necessarily important.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #29 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

You're getting sick of it because these tech sites find it necessary to post every story about it.

Not publishing it doesn't make the problem go away, and I think that's part of the point. If we don't know it's a problem, then it is more certain that nothing will be done about it.
post #30 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Write your local Democrat to get on board with the Republicans, who have been touting tort reform for years, and let's get this done!

So called "tort reform" -- especially the kind being pushed by the right -- is not the answer to this problem, for at least a couple of reasons.

First of all, the problem is not with the legal system, the problem is with the patent system. As long as patents are granted for things they ought not be, and those patents are upheld, "loser pays" won't accomplish anything toward stopping suits such as this because the bogus patent holders won't be the losers.

Secondly, the kind of "tort reform" Republicans have been pushing for has nothing to do with this. Republican "tort reform" is simply an effort to strip citizens of their right to seek meaningful redress through the courts, and make damages a predictable and small business expense.

This is good for unethical corporations and insurance companies, but not for anyone else.
post #31 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Write your local Democrat to get on board with the Republicans, who have been touting tort reform for years, and let's get this done!
/
/

So that companies don't have to ever do anything that consumers want or need? Sarcasm? I mean, republic reform wouldn't change this problem from what I understand of it... Did you mean to say have the republicans cut the budget to courts that hands consumer vs companys? Did you mean just cut all te courts? Explain please...

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply
post #32 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by markm49uk View Post

Think you need to read up on the internal combustion engine if you think Ford invented it....

Who said they needed to invent it. They just need a shell company to submit a sufficiently vague patent on it whether they invented it or not. Then they can sue. Doesn't matter if it is actually valid or not. Don't let reasonableness get in the way of legal procedural correctness.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #33 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

You're getting sick of it because these tech sites find it necessary to post every story about it.

I think that's more like it - If companies go out of business and such, report then. I'm getting patent lawsuit fatigue : D
post #34 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post

Coming Soon: Ford sues Ferrari over their use of the Internal Combustion engine.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #35 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Not publishing it doesn't make the problem go away, and I think that's part of the point. If we don't know it's a problem, then it is more certain that nothing will be done about it.

I agree. While I don't like the publicity given to them much myself, the problem needs to be dealt with and can only be seen as a big problem through publicity. Microsoft seem to be taking some much needed action in this area:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/01/m...ay-patent-tro/

Patent Trolls are euphemistically known as NPEs (non-practising entities) but IMO, if you own a piece of paper that states an idea belongs to you yet requires a tangible product to manifest its benefit, then being an NPE in most cases should invalidate your exclusive ownership of it.

There will be circumstances as always where one rule doesn't fit all such as, if you invent a fusion reactor or part of a microprocessor design whose implementation is deemed to be sufficiently beyond your means, then ownership of a certain idea would be perfectly reasonable.

The ones that are not reasonable are the generic ideas whose owners have no plans to implement them but milk profits such as the Lodsys people going after developers using in-app purchasing. The sooner rewards are stopped for the lazy and greedy, the better off we'll be.
post #36 of 65
"Universal energy conditioning interposer"
What the frak is that?
post #37 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post

Coming Soon: Ford sues Ferrari over their use of the Internal Combustion engine.

LOL Ford already sued Ferrari once for the use of the "F150" brand. As if it's possible to confuse a Ferrari with a Ford truck.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #38 of 65
First post here, been a lurker for a while, not a troll.... just found this discussion interesting...

Anyone actually go to the plantiffs (group doing the suing) web site and see what they do or find out who they are? They are far from the common 'Patent troll' companies like Lodsys. These guys actually have licensing deals with major players like Samsung and have IP's that make income on their own merit.

Yeah, on face value I totally thought it was in the same boat as a Lodsys (or that company that sued RIM a while back), but after reading up on them, they seem to be more along the line of what ARM was like very early on. ARM doesn't or didn't produce anything and was set up to license out their RISC proc technology, IIRC. If that's the case, then they should totally go after anyone that wants to steal their IP, especially when actual licenses are readily available.

Just my $.02
post #39 of 65
Just reading the story I can tell this isn't the usual patent-infringement stuff.

1. it seems to be for hardware, not software. And these folks manufacture stuff.

2. It's not filed in the Eastern District of Texas, which is the preferred locale for patent trolling (and some non-trolls as well, to be fair)

3. It is filed in Western District of Pennsylvania which is, golly gosh, where they do business

Let's wait and see how this one goes.
post #40 of 65
Regardless of legit or not, patents have no place in our nation. If you study the initial "thoughts" on patent law and the concept by the initial proponents we can readily see that this has become a proverbial circus. Forget tort reform, just freaking eliminate them. I tread on difficult ground by saying this because I'm an innovator and have books of ideas and concepts that benefit from patents, but NO ONE can truly innovate any longer in a toxic ecology like this! It's plain stupid and unfair to everyone from innovators to "users."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Patent infringement suit targets Apple over use of Intel CPUs