AMD Reckon "INTEL Wants Us Dead"

[trickson]

WOW could this really spell the end ? is this it for AMD ? I hope not AND I think NOT . Look they have been at one another like ravide dogs . I hate it when we start talking about things of this nature not to start any thing at all , But I think that AMD will live through this one as well . Intel is just string up the pot and there lawyers need to make some scratch is all . I think that AMD will be just fine they may renegotiate there contract or dump X86 all together . AMD however can not just take the X64 from Intel as well that would be a breach of contract and seen as nothing more than a retaliation move , So AMD will have to answer to this and may loose the rights to X86 this is not for us to determine or speculate on we are not in the courts we are not part of the courts but if and only if AMD goes under this will make Intel a monopoly and then they will be in front of congress just like Micro$oft was and things will never be the same !

 

[Archer0915]

WOW could this really spell the end ? is this it for AMD ? I hope not AND I think NOT . Look they have been at one another like ravide dogs . I hate it when we start talking about things of this nature not to start any thing at all , But I think that AMD will live through this one as well . Intel is just string up the pot and there lawyers need to make some scratch is all . I think that AMD will be just fine they may renegotiate there contract or dump X86 all together . AMD however can not just take the X64 from Intel as well that would be a breach of contract and seen as nothing more than a retaliation move , So AMD will have to answer to this and may loose the rights to X86 this is not for us to determine or speculate on we are not in the courts we are not part of the courts but if and only if AMD goes under this will make Intel a monopoly and then they will be in front of congress just like Micro$oft was and things will never be the same !

Trick the only thing that Intel has total control over at this point are some of the extensions (necessary albeit) as several of the x86 patents have expired.
Personally I think that AMD could pull the 64bit extensions if it is found that Intel is trying to break the contract themselves.

I do not know how well the 64bit x86 would do without the full x86 base+extensions though, but it would work in the 64 bit realm it would most likely be comparable to the P pro insomuch that it did 32 bit very well and sucked at 16 bit.

And thanks for the civility Trick.

After more reading up on other forums (sorry) and some studying up I think it would behoove AMD (and Intel to a point) to have a new contract written. As we are at the forefront of some major technological advancements and being that Intel holds the market share I believe that AMD has less incentive to innovate knowing that Intel can use anything (READ: ANYTHING) they (AMD) come up with to try and drive them out of business.

 

[I.M.O.G.]

if AMD goes under this will make Intel a monopoly and then they will be in front of congress just like Micro$oft was and things will never be the same !

Monopolies are not illegal. You only go to court if you abuse monopoly powers.

What we are discussing here is not a question of survival - its not about AMD going under, its about establishing the legal ramifications of a contract. Once the compliance and ramifications have been established, neither company is going to dissappear - the contract will simply be interpreted and enforced.

 

[nzaneb]

Once the financial situation is revealed, we'll know who's out of line. There are conflicting reports on AMD's ownership share, some reports say 34 AMD 68 ATIC, while others say it's 50/50. If AMD does only own 34%, it would mean a breach of contract. They met the requirements for the start up investments, but not the operating influence.
Intel is probably wondering the same thing, and this is the reason for the lawsuit. They just want to see the books.
On a side note, I don't think this is the ONLY reason Intel is doing this. Since AMD got additional financial backing, Intel has been looking for a way to knock them back down. With this being their first opportunity, to scream breach-of-contract... they've been looking for ANY excuse. Could Intel simply look the other way? Sure they could, but they're scared of what AMD can do when properly funded, and investing in research and development. They don't want to be caught of guard (again )... and the easiest way to prevent that, is to draw them into legal battles.

 

[trickson]

Well I would hope that some how Imtel and AMD would work this crap out it is stupid of them both to continue on the path of dog fighting as most of us have really had enough of that stuff ( Haven't we ?) I think they should be working together to put out better products and stop bickering with one another . more research and development and less litigiousness is needed IMHO . But a question I have is once this is all over with will we see any improvements at all in any of the CPU lines ? will they stop this crap and start some true R&D ?

 

[Archer0915]

Once the financial situation is revealed, we'll know who's out of line. There are conflicting reports on AMD's ownership share, some reports say 34 AMD 68 ATIC, while others say it's 50/50. If AMD does only own 34%, it would mean a breach of contract. They met the requirements for the start up investments, but not the operating influence.
Intel is probably wondering the same thing, and this is the reason for the lawsuit. They just want to see the books.
On a side note, I don't think this is the ONLY reason Intel is doing this. Since AMD got additional financial backing, Intel has been looking for a way to knock them back down. With this being their first opportunity, to scream breach-of-contract... they've been looking for ANY excuse. Could Intel simply look the other way? Sure they could, but they're scared of what AMD can do when properly funded, and investing in research and development. They don't want to be caught of guard (again )... and the easiest way to prevent that, is to draw them into legal battles.

You have a valid point and it is addressed here:

3.2.  Intel License to AMD. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
            --------------------
            Agreement, Intel hereby grants to AMD a non-exclusive,
            non-transferable ***** worldwide license, [COLOR="blue"]without the right to
            sublicense[/COLOR], under Intel's Patents to:

            (a)   [COLOR="Red"]make, use, sell (directly or indirectly), offer to sell,
                  import and otherwise dispose of all AMD Licensed Products;[/COLOR]

            (b)   [COLOR="Red"]make, have made, use and/or import any equipment and practice
                  any method or process for the manufacture, use and/or sale of
                  AMD Licensed Products; and[/COLOR]

            (c)   [COLOR="Red"]have made ***** AMD Licensed Products by another manufacturer
                  for supply solely to AMD for use, import, sale, offer for sale
                  or disposition by AMD pursuant to the license granted above in
                  Section 3.2(a).
[/COLOR]

Unless I am reading wrong AMD is working within the confines of the agreement red is what they can do blue they can not.

Well I would hope that some how Imtel and AMD would work this crap out it is stupid of them both to continue on the path of dog fighting as most of us have really had enough of that stuff ( Haven't we ?) I think they should be working together to put out better products and stop bickering with one another . more research and development and less litigiousness is needed IMHO . But a question I have is once this is all over with will we see any improvements at all in any of the CPU lines ? will they stop this crap and start some true R&D ?

Valid point a little off topic but related and truth be told after reading this, patent information and process/development guidelines I would have to say no not until the contract is renegotiated or is not renewed will we see major advancements.

 

[nzaneb]

Well I would hope that some how Imtel and AMD would work this crap out it is stupid of them both to continue on the path of dog fighting as most of us have really had enough of that stuff ( Haven't we ?) I think they should be working together to put out better products and stop bickering with one another . more research and development and less litigiousness is needed IMHO . But a question I have is once this is all over with will we see any improvements at all in any of the CPU lines ? will they stop this crap and start some true R&D ?

Intel and AMD would be best of friends if they were run by their R&D departments. Can you imagine where we would be if their R&D departments got together and had some open discussions? But unfortunately they're not in charge, they answer to the share holders who own a portion of either company for one reason only... monetary gain. A majority of the share holders, on each side, could care less what either company produces, as long as it makes them money.

 

[terran2k]

how can you put a value on AMDs intellectual property? if AMD and GlobalFoundries agree AMDs intellectual property is worth 40% of the deal + AMD threw in 10% worth of cash/human resources, can someone say otherwise? I really dont think they can.

 

[g0dM@n]

Interesting thread. Trying to read, but it seems a lot already.

 

[hooflung]

If Intel's case is found against them, AMD can pull its x64 liscense away from intel and still keep the x86 liscense.

This case is pretty wreckless unless Intel does indeed want to hurt market credibility with AMD to add to FUD about them being already on the financial rocks. Worst case scenario for Intel is to have to renegotiate, ie give a nice financial sum to AMD, to rework the original deal that works for both companies. Best case... well we all know that.

I think IP law needs a massive update. Here is the underlying power of the Consitution of the United States of America from Section 8:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

All Bills and Acts by Congress that become law are to implement these specific powers, no more and no less. Any CHANGE has to be done via the amendment process.

If the IP laws are not promoting progress then it is unconstitutional. If any company is issued a patent it should not be able to be enforced if it stymies the rest of the market. There is a clear case of AMD taking IP they liscensed and advanced it. The derived technologies from their advancement has opened markets for not only themselves but for their upstream, Intel. For intel to say see yah and thanks for the fish is to me against the spirit of the law that empowers their patent.

Using a patent to keep innovation at arm's length and under control seems like they are being empowered by people who do not have the right to make law to empower such processes. IP law is so **** right now, we're probably being held back 2 or 3 generations by big companies trying to rake in royalties.

 

[AngelfireUk83]

Interesting thread. Trying to read, but it seems a lot already.

Yes it is I am amazed on how much info has been brought up about it fantastic I think being reading it all and its great knowledge i'm glad it's kept on track.

 

[nzaneb]

how can you put a value on AMDs intellectual property? if AMD and GlobalFoundries agree AMDs intellectual property is worth 40% of the deal + AMD threw in 10% worth of cash/human resources, can someone say otherwise? I really dont think they can.

Their intellectual property would fall into the industrial property section of intellectual property. Things that would include their foundry designs, chip patents, machine designs, etc... All of these things would be included with the startup of the company.

 

[Archer0915]

If Intel's case is found against them, AMD can pull its x64 liscense away from intel and still keep the x86 liscense.

This case is pretty wreckless unless Intel does indeed want to hurt market credibility with AMD to add to FUD about them being already on the financial rocks. Worst case scenario for Intel is to have to renegotiate, ie give a nice financial sum to AMD, to rework the original deal that works for both companies. Best case... well we all know that.

I think IP law needs a massive update. Here is the underlying power of the Consitution of the United States of America from Section 8:



All Bills and Acts by Congress that become law are to implement these specific powers, no more and no less. Any CHANGE has to be done via the amendment process.

If the IP laws are not promoting progress then it is unconstitutional. If any company is issued a patent it should not be able to be enforced if it stymies the rest of the market. There is a clear case of AMD taking IP they liscensed and advanced it. The derived technologies from their advancement has opened markets for not only themselves but for their upstream, Intel. For intel to say see yah and thanks for the fish is to me against the spirit of the law that empowers their patent.

Using a patent to keep innovation at arm's length and under control seems like they are being empowered by people who do not have the right to make law to empower such processes. IP law is so **** right now, we're probably being held back 2 or 3 generations by big companies trying to rake in royalties.

I am hoping that I am not misinterpreting your post and if in my response it seems I am please make a post letting me know as your post can be read in two ways. My post will only concentrate on one of those ways as to nip a potential debate in the bud.

The patent laws allow for a time of exclusivity to the originator to award their efforts and and promote inventiveness. Most cooperation's are only focused on profits and this gives the motive to innovate and without the benefit of exclusiveness the profit margins would/may not justify the initial investment. As to the CPU market as well as other tech. sector areas some modification could be made but the ramifications of such could be catastrophic if implementation was in any way carried out inappropriately.

I honestly feel that innovation could be hurt by tampering with currently implemented laws without close examination and major scrutinization of any proposed changes.

 

[Sgt_Pinto]

Wait... intel has access to anything AMD makes as long as it slightly uses x86??

Thats so gay. How is AMD ment to compete if anything they make can be used by intel?

 

[Archer0915]

Wait... intel has access to anything AMD makes as long as it slightly uses x86??

That's so gay. How is AMD meant to compete if anything they make can be used by Intel?

I agree but this type of agreement probably looked good to AMD at the time but now owning ATI I just don't know? It is quite possible this is where Larabee had it's origins. Also PQI everyone said it was stolen Idea from AMD after reading this agreement I don't know about that (stolen) and depending on the actual implementation it may not even be closley related. I think that both of these companies have a lot to lose it the agreement becomes void. I think that at this point in time a new agreement would be in order allowing both companies to benefit from all current CPU implementations and all future developments be approached on an individual basis.

 

[Sgt_Pinto]

Intel must have been 1 happy chappy when AMD took over ATi.

Intel doesnt need to spend any money getting all of ATi's secrets and Intel can also watch AMD struggle to stay afloat because of the HUGE loss of funds.

Man they are SMART.

Or AMD is really dumb.

 

[Archer0915]

AMD at the time was desperate and we also don't know about what is blotted out in the contract. They had 3Dnow and some other early simd instructions to use but that was about it they needed to secure other extensions to remain competitive so it was not a bad move at the time. Also they did not have ATI at the time and there may be unseen stipulations that involve acquisitions made during the agreement period though I doubt it.

 

[hooflung]

I am hoping that I am not misinterpreting your post and if in my response it seems I am please make a post letting me know as your post can be read in two ways. My post will only concentrate on one of those ways as to nip a potential debate in the bud.

The patent laws allow for a time of exclusivity to the originator to award their efforts and and promote inventiveness. Most cooperation's are only focused on profits and this gives the motive to innovate and without the benefit of exclusiveness the profit margins would/may not justify the initial investment. As to the CPU market as well as other tech. sector areas some modification could be made but the ramifications of such could be catastrophic if implementation was in any way carried out inappropriately.

I honestly feel that innovation could be hurt by tampering with currently implemented laws without close examination and major scrutinization of any proposed changes.

I am saying that laws are ONLY empowered by the constitutional powers given to Congress. Section 8 of the Constitution is the ONLY section where that power is described. Acts are Implementations of those powers.

Bills are legislature prosing an Act. Many bills that pass are illegal, unconstitutional and quite frankly are built to undermine constitutional limits and get people to argue over the spirit of the nature of said power.

Intel has exclusive powers over x86 and should be able to licenses that tech to whomever they want. However, it is of my opinion that once a licensee derives a product that pushes the innovation they should be allowed free access to the original work. At the same time Intel should be allowed free access to the derived work. AMD should be able to license the derived work to non-Intel organizations as long as they [the x64 licensee] has an Intel license for x86.

If they [the new x86-64 liscensee] can extend x86-64 to where it opens new markets and innovates then rinse and repeat.

For one company to think they can hold all the cards just because they have a patent I believe that is against the spirit and language of the constitutional power given to congress. Any Act that undermines that is to me, unconstitutional and therefore out of order.

 

[Archer0915]

I am saying that laws are ONLY empowered by the constitutional powers given to Congress. Section 8 of the Constitution is the ONLY section where that power is described. Acts are Implementations of those powers.

Bills are legislature prosing an Act. Many bills that pass are illegal, unconstitutional and quite frankly are built to undermine constitutional limits and get people to argue over the spirit of the nature of said power.

Intel has exclusive powers over x86 and should be able to licenses that tech to whomever they want. However, it is of my opinion that once a licensee derives a product that pushes the innovation they should be allowed free access to the original work. At the same time Intel should be allowed free access to the derived work. AMD should be able to license the derived work to non-Intel organizations as long as they [the x64 licensee] has an Intel license for x86.

If they [the new x86-64 liscensee] can extend x86-64 to where it opens new markets and innovates then rinse and repeat.

For one company to think they can hold all the cards just because they have a patent I believe that is against the spirit and language of the constitutional power given to congress. Any Act that undermines that is to me, unconstitutional and therefore out of order.

Intel does not under law have exclusive rights to all x86 only extensions to x86 that they have developed any company or individual can make a 486 cpu as those patents have expired if I am not mistaken. It is only newer extensions that Intel holds.

As to your point it may look good and be good but as I have said implementation is almost impossible without hurting innovation.

 

[hooflung]

Intel does not under law have exclusive rights to all x86 only extensions to x86 that they have developed any company or individual can make a 486 cpu as those patents have expired if I am not mistaken. It is only newer extensions that Intel holds.

So you can make a 386 now without legal action. Pentium+ is still covered in the 20 year patent expiration time and this is where the fun stuff. SIMD is also a patent they hold, in many varieties.

As to your point it may look good and be good but as I have said implementation is almost impossible without hurting innovation.

Yeah, following the meaning of the laws would never work. I mean, it has gotten us this far right? Antitrust lawsuits flying around the globe and a total economic collapse. Let us not follow the law, let us make new legaleese that goes to the highest bider.