TSMC and GlobalFoundries settle legal dispute, sign cross-licensing deal

Posted:
in General Discussion
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company and competitor GlobalFoundries on Monday inked an agreement to cross-license certain patents related to semiconductor technology, resolving a two-month-old multi-jurisdictional legal dispute that threatened the businesses of customers like TSMC partner Apple.




Under terms of what is being billed as a "broad" global patent cross-licensing deal, TSMC and GlobalFoundries will license each other's existing worldwide semiconductor patents, as well as future intellectual property filed in the next 10 years, in a bid to halt hostilities.

The solution allows companies reliant on TSMC and GlobalFoundries silicon to freely access the chipmakers' technologies and services. Apple, for example, is no longer in danger of being subject to a potential ban on iOSM devices operating on A-series chip fabricated in TSMC's foundry.

"The semiconductor industry has always been highly competitive, driving the players to pursue innovation that enriched the lives of millions of people around the world. TSMC has invested tens of billions of dollars towards innovation to reach our leading position today." said Sylvia Fang, General Counsel for TSMC. "The resolution is a positive development that keeps our focus on advancing the needs of our customers for technologies that will continue to bring innovation to life, enabling the entire semiconductor industry to thrive and prosper."

GlobalFoundries in August filed multiple complaints against TSMC, Apple and other associated companies for alleged infringement of 13 U.S. patents and three German patents covering semiconductor manufacturing processes. Lawsuits were filed in Delaware, Texas and Germany, while a complaint was lodged with the U.S. International Trade Commission.

TSMC vowed to fight the legal barrage, saying it was confident that the allegations were "baseless." Apple's chip supplier answered back in September with its own set of patent infringement lawsuits filed in Germany, Singapore and the U.S.

With a steady stream of orders coming in from Apple and other big-name technology sector players, TSMC is considered the world's largest contract chipmaker. The company's latest and most advanced chip, Apple's A13 Bionic, is thought to be fabricated on a special 7nm process dubbed "N7 Pro."

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I have to think Global realized just how stupid their actions where.  They literaLly attacked a company that their customers had to turn to.   The big one being AMD.  I can’t imagine AMD was all too happy about remaining work at Global considering how far behind Global is.  Makes me wonder if Apple was expressing private thoughts about the wisdom of supporting anything Global manufactured.  

    It is pretty simple really, Global lost business due to getting behind.   They simply don’t have a bleeding edge solution which means business goes elsewhere.  
    chaickaviclauyyc
  • Reply 2 of 12
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    The whole thing is interesting. I wonder what TSMC patents GF will be able to use to seriously advance their production. Remember that they gave up on fabbing anything below 12nm a year ago. This won’t help them do that. $12 billion in funds would, but they won’t get it.
    h2p
  • Reply 3 of 12
    Indeed...The semi-con industry has always been different from the rest of tech industry. They push forward with innovation instead of suing each other. It’s common to have step on each others’ IP along the way. If this has ended up following through the ‘suing’ route, it will open up a whole lot of shit. 
  • Reply 4 of 12
    melgross said:
    The whole thing is interesting. I wonder what TSMC patents GF will be able to use to seriously advance their production. Remember that they gave up on fabbing anything below 12nm a year ago. This won’t help them do that. $12 billion in funds would, but they won’t get it.
    Each has IP the other needs. TSMC likely needs access to the IBM IP GF bought to meet it's 5nm and 3nm goals. GF is focusing on areas TMSC is not. TSMC can only produce so much output that it will have to eventually call upon the likes of GF to offset demand it cannot meet. I await the new ``process nodes'' GF starts up that will most certainly happen.
  • Reply 5 of 12
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,278member
    TSMC can only produce so much output that it will have to eventually call upon the likes of GF to offset demand it cannot meet. 
    ????

    This isn't the game Monopoly, with a limited number of hotels that must be shared by all the players. TSMC is perfectly able to build as many fabs as it needs to. If Taiwan runs out of space, they can build them in Texas or tons of other places (and they should seriously do that anyway for risk diversification reasons). 

    More broadly... The history of the semiconductor industry has been one of firms dropping out of the race to the next node, as every next node is more expensive than the last. IBM, Texas Instruments, Motorola, AMD, and DEC are some examples that come to mind. The survivors have been the ones with enough volume (profit) to fund the next node. 

    When GF gave up on 7nm, it brought us down to just three -- TSMC, Intel, and Samsung. 

    Intel used to be the leader because they were the biggest fish in the biggest pond -- the PC market. Now the PC market looks like a small pond next to the ocean of mobile, and TSMC is the biggest fish in this much larger market. 

    The big question in my mind is -- who drops out next? Intel or Samsung? 

    edited October 2019
  • Reply 6 of 12
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,278member
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
  • Reply 7 of 12
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    melgross said:
    The whole thing is interesting. I wonder what TSMC patents GF will be able to use to seriously advance their production. Remember that they gave up on fabbing anything below 12nm a year ago. This won’t help them do that. $12 billion in funds would, but they won’t get it.
    Each has IP the other needs. TSMC likely needs access to the IBM IP GF bought to meet it's 5nm and 3nm goals. GF is focusing on areas TMSC is not. TSMC can only produce so much output that it will have to eventually call upon the likes of GF to offset demand it cannot meet. I await the new ``process nodes'' GF starts up that will most certainly happen.
    I don’t know. There is no evidence that TSMC had any interest in that before GF sued them, and they sued back. I believe that this is more of a face saving deal than anything else. I’m sure that both will get minor advantages. But this is just a way of getting out of the mess, which would be expensive, and distracting.

    tsmc has all the money it needs to produce anything it needs. GF is tiny in comparison. GF isn’t going to produce any more state of the art, new process anything. They’re of no use to TSMC. In fact, with TSMC announcing that they’re increasing their capital spending on new plant for advanced process nodes, such as 5 and even 3, from $11 billion to $20 billion, I don’t see where GF could possibly fit in there.
    edited October 2019
  • Reply 8 of 12
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member

    blastdoor said:
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
    I see no reason why Apple would go to AMD even though people have been saying this for years. and us periodically successful, as they are now, and then, they aren’t. People have been saying that because Apple has been using their GPUs, they would obviously be using their CPUs as well. Bah! Nonsense.

    arm is somewhat different. But I still believe that while Apple is undoubtedly looking into it, it’s harder than people think it is, and I’ve given my reasons many times. That doesn’t mean I think Apple will never do it, but it requires much more than a good ARM chip.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 9 of 12
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    blastdoor said:
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
    I honestly think Apple has little choice but to roll their own processor if they want to keep innovating in the PC market place.  As I’ve said in the past the SoC is the PCB of a few decade ago. Apple needs access to the die.   

    As for AMD that might be the only place they could go for a custom chip with Apple IP integrated.    Intel seems to have lost its rudder so they are out for a custom X86 SoC.  So if Apple wants to stay with X86 I really see them teaming up with AMD to deliver a custom chip.  


    Of course this depends upon Apple giving a damn about the Mac.  Everything I’ve seen over the last few years seems to indicate that the Mac is a big bother to them.   Frankly I don’t see the Mac in a good light anymore.   Everything they have come out with of late seems to be more bling than working mAchine.  And yes that includes the new Mac Pro.  
  • Reply 10 of 12
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    wizard69 said:
    blastdoor said:
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
    I honestly think Apple has little choice but to roll their own processor if they want to keep innovating in the PC market place.  As I’ve said in the past the SoC is the PCB of a few decade ago. Apple needs access to the die.   

    As for AMD that might be the only place they could go for a custom chip with Apple IP integrated.    Intel seems to have lost its rudder so they are out for a custom X86 SoC.  So if Apple wants to stay with X86 I really see them teaming up with AMD to deliver a custom chip.  


    Of course this depends upon Apple giving a damn about the Mac.  Everything I’ve seen over the last few years seems to indicate that the Mac is a big bother to them.   Frankly I don’t see the Mac in a good light anymore.   Everything they have come out with of late seems to be more bling than working mAchine.  And yes that includes the new Mac Pro.  
    I think Apple does care about the Mac. But no matter how large a company is, they can’t pay as much attention to one area when they do to another. I think it swings back and forth.
  • Reply 11 of 12
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,278member
    melgross said:
    wizard69 said:
    blastdoor said:
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
    I honestly think Apple has little choice but to roll their own processor if they want to keep innovating in the PC market place.  As I’ve said in the past the SoC is the PCB of a few decade ago. Apple needs access to the die.   

    As for AMD that might be the only place they could go for a custom chip with Apple IP integrated.    Intel seems to have lost its rudder so they are out for a custom X86 SoC.  So if Apple wants to stay with X86 I really see them teaming up with AMD to deliver a custom chip.  


    Of course this depends upon Apple giving a damn about the Mac.  Everything I’ve seen over the last few years seems to indicate that the Mac is a big bother to them.   Frankly I don’t see the Mac in a good light anymore.   Everything they have come out with of late seems to be more bling than working mAchine.  And yes that includes the new Mac Pro.  
    I think Apple does care about the Mac. But no matter how large a company is, they can’t pay as much attention to one area when they do to another. I think it swings back and forth.

    I have agreed with many of Wizard69's criticism over the years and I think skepticism is warranted. But I think there's also reason for hope. Apple is just a collection of managers and employees, and so priorities can shift depending on who is in key decision making positions. My hope is that the departure of Ive might lead to better decisions for the Mac, and we are seeing some signs that might be a realistic hope. 

    I wonder if Jony Ive found the Mac boring (more interested in wearables now) and so was more focused on other things. Yet, as Chief Design Officer, he might have been an organizational bottle neck in moving Mac designs forward and/or pushed designs in unfortunate directions. I can't help but notice that Ive leaves and the MacBook Air is revitalized, the MacBook is dropped, and we get word that keyboard improvements are coming. The new Mac Pro design also is very functional, and only beautiful to people who understand and appreciate the function -- it in no way compromises function in favor of form, which was clearly not true of the 2013 model. 
  • Reply 12 of 12
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    wizard69 said:
    blastdoor said:
    Now that TSMC is the clear leader in fab process, it makes even more sense for Apple to dump Intel in the Mac. 

    And given AMD's erratic history, and Apple's awesome design team, it might make more sense for Apple to roll their own than to switch from Intel to AMD. 

    But who knows... when the A7 came out, I predicted Apple would put their own ARM chips in Macs in 2017. Clearly that didn't happen!
    I honestly think Apple has little choice but to roll their own processor if they want to keep innovating in the PC market place.  As I’ve said in the past the SoC is the PCB of a few decade ago. Apple needs access to the die.   

    As for AMD that might be the only place they could go for a custom chip with Apple IP integrated.    Intel seems to have lost its rudder so they are out for a custom X86 SoC.  So if Apple wants to stay with X86 I really see them teaming up with AMD to deliver a custom chip.  


    Of course this depends upon Apple giving a damn about the Mac.  Everything I’ve seen over the last few years seems to indicate that the Mac is a big bother to them.   Frankly I don’t see the Mac in a good light anymore.   Everything they have come out with of late seems to be more bling than working mAchine.  And yes that includes the new Mac Pro.  
    I think Apple does care about the Mac. But no matter how large a company is, they can’t pay as much attention to one area when they do to another. I think it swings back and forth.

    I have agreed with many of Wizard69's criticism over the years and I think skepticism is warranted. But I think there's also reason for hope. Apple is just a collection of managers and employees, and so priorities can shift depending on who is in key decision making positions. My hope is that the departure of Ive might lead to better decisions for the Mac, and we are seeing some signs that might be a realistic hope. 

    I wonder if Jony Ive found the Mac boring (more interested in wearables now) and so was more focused on other things. Yet, as Chief Design Officer, he might have been an organizational bottle neck in moving Mac designs forward and/or pushed designs in unfortunate directions. I can't help but notice that Ive leaves and the MacBook Air is revitalized, the MacBook is dropped, and we get word that keyboard improvements are coming. The new Mac Pro design also is very functional, and only beautiful to people who understand and appreciate the function -- it in no way compromises function in favor of form, which was clearly not true of the 2013 model. 
    I believe that people give Ive too much credit for what his influence actually involved. I doubt very highly that it had anything to do with whether the Mac or iOS devices were favored. So he’s either considered to be a savior or a devil, depending on people’s perspectives. As usual, it’s going to be somewhere between.

    when iPhone, amd later iPad sales were going off the roof, Apple moved much of its energy towards them. Now that they’ve cooled off, it’s moving more to the Mac and wearables, plus services. If iPhone sales soar again, which is always possible, with the iPad following, the company will devote more effort back to that. But I like a more balanced company.
    edited October 2019
Sign In or Register to comment.