That country also does not care about democarcy, human rights, treats non-majority badly, privacy is a joke and that country gov has the final say and its courts favour the state. No please If something comes from that place it is likely going to come with backdoors worse than what we have now and if it does grow and it will only make that country's state gov have more control in the tech space.But thankfully there is a country that doesn't care much about such fabrications as IP and will move the humanity forward despite the lawyers
Are you talking about USA or PRC? I cannot tell. But I digress as it all seems off topic politicsThat country also does not care about democarcy, human rights, treats non-majority badly, privacy is a joke and that country gov has the final say and its courts favour the state. No please If something comes from that place it is likely going to come with backdoors worse than what we have now and if it does grow and it will only make that country's state gov have more control in the tech space.
I would much rather deal with "IP theft" being taken too far than ever deal with that countries tech and IP.
of course ideas are not IP but they likely stole Apple's documents and designs which are the property of Apple not the employee.idea's aren't IP and you don't think that the guy who was chief of the A7 toA12 cores had lots of idea's about how to make a fast CPU? How well have Apple progressed in CPU performance since his departure ?
Apple alleges. But we won't have resolution until that other court case resolves in 2023.of course ideas are not IP but they likely stole Apple's documents and designs which are the property of Apple not the employee.
It's "IP theft" in name only. it is the same intellectuals evolving on their ideas. Yet because it has some elements in common with Apple it could be a basis for a patent lawsuit.
Nuvia was making a new design. I don't get your how aboutism. The best they could do to safely productize their design is to be consumed by a near monopoly because of their vulnerability to our overreaching IP law.
Try designing a high performance CPU without stepping on patents. And there's nothing wrong with improving on your previous work.
Apple alleges. But we won't have resolution until that other court case resolves in 2023.
Apple's terms of employment are absurd. For example, Apple says that things you work on in your off time are also their intellectual property. Totally non-enforceable in most reasonable countries.I get what you mean but they chose to work at Apple and they agreed to the terms. Those enginners knew that all they work they did at Apple will belong to Apple.
For example: Raja cannot use whatever IP he designed for AMD at Intel now because that now belongs to AMD. It does not matter if he created the GPU design, its for AMD to use and AMD can allow others to use the designs if they allow. Raja cannot use the same designs as he used at AMD at Intel and change a fews things and call it a day.
Apple has many secrets that people want to steal and at times Apple is right.
Former Apple car engineer pleads guilty to trade secret theft
Prosecutors alleged worker downloaded plans for Apple’s self-driving program before booking last-minute flight to China.www.aljazeera.com
yes agree but getting back on topic Qualcomm should not have allowed this go this far and did whatever ARM told them to do. I say this because Nuvia designs are awesome. If they do ever come out it will have the best ST at very low power per core.Apple's terms of employment are absurd. For example, Apple says that things you work on in your off time are also their intellectual property. Totally non-enforceable in most reasonable countries.
And he alleges Apple was suing him vindictively as well. Who knows which is right, I haven't seen any documents from the case.
But again I find it funny lawyers are getting in the way of engineers trying to create more products because Apple insists the ideas in his head are their property not his.
Yes I find it hard to believe it was in Qualcomm's best interest to let it get to this point. But I don't consider it impossible arm was itself being difficult given Qualcomm's opposition to the Nvidia acquisition. It was announced about 4 months before the Nuvia acquisition.yes agree but getting back on topic Qualcomm should not have allowed this go this far and did whatever ARM told them to do. I say this because Nuvia designs are awesome. If they do ever come out it will have the best ST at very low power per core.
Intel and AMD would feel it in the laptop space.
Apple's terms of employment are absurd. For example, Apple says that things you work on in your off time are also their intellectual property.
More like a braindead move. Arm as the licensor clearly has the upper hand here and sets the rules, and Qualcomm actively endangers its ARM license, something pretty much all of its business rely on. What is the gain for Qualcomm in that?
Indeed. Qualcomm looked how far it can get pushing its weight around. Personally I highly doubt in settlement Arm will be willing to offer licensing conditions equal or better than what was offered before this escalated to a lawsuit. It's in Arm's and really all ARM licensees' interest that not any heavyweight can dictate its own licensing conditions.The gain is getting to cheap out on licensing fees by acting under Nuvia's license. Both Nuvia and Qualcomm have an ALA, but ARM are (and were for a year before they revoked Nuvia's ALA) stating that Nuvia's core designs would have to be relicensed under a new ALA with Qualcomm that accounted for the fact that Qualcomm is a much larger company with more products, thus the ARM IP included would be more widespread.
That's the justification ARM will use for a relicensing, and frankly, it's justified if you ask me. Licensing deals like this are sized based off of the customer because it's in both party's interest for the customer to do well. Knee-capping them wouldn't exactly be smart. It doesn't make sense for an established giant like Qualcomm to be paying a licensing deal designed for a small startup for such a major product. ARM will want Qualcomm to pay more in line with their size.
Lets be real here: this case will probably end up in a settlement. ARM don't really have a lot to gain by killing Nuvia cores entirely. Qualcomm are still an active customer for their in-house cores and will be even after the Nuvia cores get integrated - at least for a while - souring that relationship would not go well. Qualcomm are likely aware of this - they likely don't think ARM will take the case the whole way, so if they think they can piece together a cohesive defense that lets them contest ARM's then they win overall. If they don't, they'll almost certainly be able to settle the case regardless. It's not like ARM is going to burn down the entire bridge here - especially not after the failed NvidiArm. Losing a massive customer like Qualcomm would be a mighty blow.
From outside it certainly can seem like a self-destructive move by Arm, especially at a time RISC-V continues to gain mindshare. But I'm sure Arm didn't take that step lightly and Qualcomm's behavior preceding the lawsuit was endangering the current state from inside. If you allow one of the biggest licensees to freely interpret the license conditions on its own and disrespecting the licensor's policies as they come in you can bet other licensees to try to follow suit.I don't think this is a good move by Arm, or one in the best interests of the ecosystem. If IP can't transfer from an acquired company to the acquiring company, even if both have an architectural license, that greatly reduces the value of ARM-compatible semiconductor vendors with custom cores on the M&A market. Additionally, Nuvia being successful benefits the overall ecosystem.
I suspect this will end up being settled, but if not, it seems self-defeating.
I don't think this is a good move by Arm, or one in the best interests of the ecosystem. If IP can't transfer from an acquired company to the acquiring company, even if both have an architectural license, that greatly reduces the value of ARM-compatible semiconductor vendors with custom cores on the M&A market. Additionally, Nuvia being successful benefits the overall ecosystem.
I suspect this will end up being settled, but if not, it seems self-defeating.
Depending how this case develops we may well be able to expand this "exception to the rule" (if it's even is one) with Cristiano Amon.When you spend $1.4 billion you do your homework first, right? (unless you are Elon Musk)
ARM/SoftBank are still reeling from poor decisions made by SoftBank in other markets (WeWork) and the failed attempt to market ARM to NV. This entire matter may be a brazen attempt by ARM to squeeze money out of Qualcomm where they may ultimately be proven to be in the wrong. Sadly it will result in Nuvia IP making it to market late (or never). It's also very bad news for ARM in general since a successful countersuit for damages could drain ARM of an enormous amount of wealth.
Finally a well reasoned statement! Nuvia guys went to Qualcomm to work on PC/Phones CPUs and Qualcomm has indeed such a license. I does not really matter on what potential products Nuvia worked before with their Server License. Indeed sounds to me as Softbank tries make some quick money.
That being said, it's got to be one hell of a complicated (and potentially unenforceable) license that would prohibit Qualcomm from launching Nuvia IP.
Not really, it just has to include the term "non-transferable", and a requirement that if the license is canceled under the terms of the contract (i.e. by a transfer of ownership) then all IP created under the license must be destroyed.
I've seen contracts with both those requirements, so it wouldn't be unusual nor unenforceable.
Also in the lawsuit they admit they refuse to let Qualcomm release it under their existing architectural license. In fact that's probably what provoked it. Qualcomm submitted the design to arm for validation (lol) under the terms of Qualcomm's architectural license
In the end arm now insists it renegotiates all ARM-derived IP at acquisition. Your acquired license is useless and you cannot transfer it to an existing license. You have to negotiate a new license for all acquired ARM-derived IP. If you are on bad terms with ARM, good luck -- the fees will not be reasonable. ARM is effectively poisoned now.
Not really, it just has to include the term "non-transferable", and a requirement that if the license is canceled under the terms of the contract (i.e. by a transfer of ownership) then all IP created under the license must be destroyed.