[GamersNexus] Asetek Demands AMD Cease Sales of Fury X on Infringement Claims

[railven]

Sorry, I should have linked where the images came from: http://www.legitreviews.com/120mm-water-cooler-round-up-part-2-looking-inside_129601

This has 2 Zalman coolers, as well as the CM and a Scythe (Asketek design) taken apart. The "Final Thoughts" page talks about some of the patent suits going on...

Edit - Zalman might be licensing Asetek's design as well, not sure on that...

The Legit Review said Zalman licensed for the LQ315 but not the Reserator 3 Max, and when they did a break down of those two, one being Asetek design the other isn't disclosed (perhaps Zalman internal), they found the same thing:

 

[boozzer]

but how does it compare to other designs though? if other AIO coolers are all similarly designed, CM would have nothing to worry about.

 

[96Firebird]

but how does it compare to other designs though? if other AIO coolers are all similarly designed, CM would have nothing to worry about.

Most of the others license from Asetek...

 

[railven]

but how does it compare to other designs though? if other AIO coolers are all similarly designed, CM would have nothing to worry about.

From reading, the Asetek design became hugely popular, because essentially it's just a small turbine mounted on the cooling plate. Pretty much everyone started licensing it, except Cooler Master who "made" their own.

The market for AIO was small, even the EK one linked by RS isn't a closed loop, since it's expandable.

 

[boozzer]

if they all bought licenses, cm is in huge trouble.

 

[RussianSensation]

RS is over simplfying. It isn't because the pump is physically located on the mount, it's because they literally copied the Asetek design.

No, I am not. Before dismissing my claims, please follow all the links I provided and read them. You should read in detail and analyze Asetek's actual drawings that they submitted to see what they patented. It has nothing to do with "identical" design. Clearly Fury X and Gigabyte Xtreme 980Ti's cooling plates and so on are not identical but it doesn't matter.

"Sure, Asetek’s patent has actually been in the works for the past 6 years, but that doesn’t change the fact that their solution is in no way unique or novel to what has already been implemented before. They’ve intentionally made their patent vague so that it wouldn’t appear to target graphics cards exactly, but the reality is that GPUs are the hottest possible add-in card you could install in your system and Asetek knows it.

They’ve also made their patent intentionally vague in order to catch any other possible implementations where something like a Xeon Phi add-in card (as opposed to the socketed ones) would require cooling but isn’t technically a graphics card.

Their first patent application mentions a “graphics card thermal interposer” but fails to mention any innovations such as microchannels, which didn’t exist at that time but is mentioned in this granted patent filing. In fact, the actual patent that was granted changes the language to “Thermal interposer liquid cooling system” and includes both liquid cooling systems and cold plate assemblies. There are some included drawings as well, but if you get the jist of it, using the drawings and the claimed language, they’re basically trying to claim a patent on a self-contained GPU water cooling system where the radiator has a fan and is not directly attached to the GPU.

http://vrworld.com/2014/07/02/aseteks-watercooling-patent-will-hurt-consumers/

You can literally create a GPU cooling unit that looks completely different from Asetek's and lose. It's the process/idea that they patented before they even created such products themselves!!! Obviously if you copy 100% their existing 120mm AIO CLC designs, you will just lose even quicker but even if you do not copy the physical design but you copy the idea of putting the pump with the waterblock, you'd still lose.

"But as you can see, Asetek has had quite a few patents for various things which include server liquid cooling and generic liquid cooling solutions. However, Asetek has done this before time and time again, by patenting something that their competitors already have on the market and then using that patent to either kill their products or to get some sort of a cut. "

It's YOU who is over-simplying this patent troll company. Again, the fault here is entirely on the U.S.'s archaic patent system and Asetek is riding it all the way to the bank.

if they all bought licenses, cm is in huge trouble.

Ya, exactly since there is precedent for the patent wins on Asetek's behalf that granted them the right to collect licenses from similar cases. That means the lawsuit would be directed at CM and by extension all products CM sells which breach the patent(s). If CM sold products to NV, AMD, Intel, an injunction would be issued to stop the sale of all of those products since CM is in breach of patent with Asetek. Essentially it means CM is liable to Asetek and CM is liable to AMD since CM would be unable to fulfill the obligations of its supplier agreement with AMD.

If CM loses, and fails to pay a licensing fee, CM defaults on the supplier agreement with AMD and there is termination. If CM agrees to pay the licensing fee, they cannot pass on these costs to AMD since the supplier agreement between AMD and CM would likely be a firm-fixed price contract to minimize the risk for the buyer (AMD). That means if any costs of production, licensing, logistics, warranty go up on behalf of CM, it's not AMD's problem since they would have negotiated a fixed price per unit sold based on estimated # of units. CM would have provided them some breakdown such as 1000 AIOs CLC cost $30/unit, 5000 AIO CLC cost $29/unit, 10000 AIO CLC cost $28/unit, etc.

The problem is Asetek files these other vague patents about GPU cooling system, which would then also apply to AMD, NV, Intel. Essentially they would ultimate force AMD, NV, Intel or their AIBs to pay licensing fees as well.

 

[railven]

Here is the CoolIt design with the pump on the mounting plate, notice it doesn't use a turbine.

So yes, RS is wrong about the sole reason is the motor being on the mounting plate:

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2705&page=1

The actual watercooling system is manufactured by Coolit Systems out of Calgary, just as other liquid cooling systems in the marketplace are made by Asetek.

Pump on mounting plate:

No turbine:

EDIT:
Even the H220 has the pump located on the mounting plate. But they changed the pump design, check it out:

So that's two cooling systems with the motor on the mounting plate unaffected by the Asetek patent.

 

[Techhog]

I wonder how the Nvidia fanboys would be reacting if Nvidia were directly affected instead of just AMD and one niche Gigabyte card. :/

Warning issued for thread crapping.
-- stahlhart

 

[railven]

I wonder how the Nvidia fanboys would be reacting if Nvidia were directly affected instead of just AMD and one niche Gigabyte card. :/

Well...this does affect Nvidia. Did you not read the OP?

EDIT: Oh, you mean if nvidia made their reference design as AMD did with the Fury X? I guess for people who bought it, they wouldn't care. For people waiting to buy it, if it were one of the reason for the stock issues, they'd probably be pissed.

 

[boozzer]

Ya, exactly since there is precedent for the patent wins on Asetek's behalf that granted them the right to collect licenses from similar cases. That means the lawsuit would be directed at CM and by extension all products CM sells which breach the patent(s). If CM sold products to NV, AMD, Intel, an injunction would be issued to stop the sale of all of those products since CM is in breach of patent with Asetek. Essentially it means CM is liable to Asetek and CM is liable to AMD since CM would be unable to fulfill the obligations of its supplier agreement with AMD.

If CM loses, and fails to pay a licensing fee, CM defaults on the supplier agreement with AMD and there is termination. If CM agrees to pay the licensing fee, they cannot pass on these costs to AMD since the supplier agreement between AMD and CM would likely be a firm-fixed price contract to minimize the risk for the buyer (AMD). That means if any costs of production, licensing, logistics, warranty go up on behalf of CM, it's not AMD's problem since they would have negotiated a fixed price per unit sold based on estimated # of units. CM would have provided them some breakdown such as 1000 AIOs CLC cost $30/unit, 5000 AIO CLC cost $29/unit, 10000 AIO CLC cost $28/unit, etc.

The problem is Asetek files these other vague patents about GPU cooling system, which would then also apply to AMD, NV, Intel. Essentially they would ultimate force AMD, NV, Intel or their AIBs to pay licensing fees as well.

I would love to see assetek take on the big ones.

I do love their strategy though. take on small fish first to established precedent, then go big in steps, eventually the biggest fish in the pond.

 

[RussianSensation]

So yes, RS is wrong about the sole reason is the motor being on the mounting plate:

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2705&page=1

It's kinda hard to have a discussion with you when you A) Don't read my posts in detail; B) Do not read the articles I link by 3rd parties explaining the broad patents; C) Make up stuff I didn't say such as sliding the word "sole reason" when I actually went out of my way to provide even more evidence that shows that the patents go far beyond just the pump being located on the water block.

CoolIT got sued btw and they lost.

So that's two cooling systems with the motor on the mounting plate unaffected by the Asetek patent.

False. They are 100% affected. All of the CoolIT systems (the one you linked is from 2012 so of course back then Asetek didn't even sue yet but they eventually sued) and the Swiftech H220 are 100% affected.

You would have known this of course had you bothered reading my posts and subsequent proof in the links provided. It's a 100% fact that CoolIT and Swiftech H220 were sued by Asetek and they both lost. That's why it's impossible to buy the old H220 in the US. It's why Swiftech's newest H220-X, H240-X units moved the pump away from the water block.

Swiftech decided to withdraw all old units from the market in cases where the pump was integrated into the water block because it would have cost them more $ to fight the Asetek's patent claims. As for CoolIT, here you go:

"Asetek announces that it has concluded its patent infringement lawsuit against CoolIT Systems, Inc. On June 12, 2015, the United States District Court for the Northern California (San Jose) determined that CoolIT Systems, Inc. shall pay damages to Asetek in the amount of $1,873,168."

http://www.asetek.com/press-room/ne...onclusion-of-lawsuit-with-coolit-systems-inc/

Like what's the point of even trying to have a discussion on this topic with you when you literally just make up facts and do not even bother doing research and reading the details?

I would love to see assetek take on the big ones.

I do love their strategy though. take on small fish first to established precedent, then go big in steps, eventually the biggest fish in the pond.

Why? You do realize it benefits them not us. If the suppliers have to pay licensing fees, and if AMD/NV/Intel have to pay licensing fees for GPU cooling designs with heatpipes and block mounted on top of the GPU, guess who is paying those costs over time? We are. Those costs will be passed onto the consumer.

 

[railven]

It's kinda hard to have a discussion with you when you A) Don't read my posts in detail; B) Do not read the articles I link by 3rd parties explaining the broad patents; C) Make up stuff I didn't say such as sliding the word "sole reason" when I actually went out of my way to provide even more evidence that shows that the patents go far beyond just the pump being located on the water block.

CoolIT got sued btw and they lost.



False. They are 100% affected. All of the CoolIT systems (the one you linked is from 2012 so of course back then Asetek didn't even sue yet) and the Swiftech H220 are 100% affected.

You would have known this of course had you bothered reading my posts and subsequent proof in the links provided. It's a 100% fact that CoolIT and Swiftech H220 were sued by Asetek and they both lost. That's why it's impossible to buy the old H220 in the US.



Why? You do realize it benefits them not us. If the suppliers have to pay licensing fees, and if AMD/NV/Intel have to pay licensing fees for GPU cooling designs with heatpipes and block mounted on op of the GPU, guess who is paying those costs over time? We are. Those costs will be passed on to the consumer.

Neither lost. Swiftech never went to court, they yanked the cooler from the US. Coolit is still in battle with Asetek, filling their own patent claims.

You can still readily buy those designs, and neither are paying Asetek a royalty. Again, you were wrong. The sole reason isn't because the pump is placed on the mounting plate.

The only company found infringing was Coolermaster. The reason is more than obvious looking at the products they put out that were affected.

 

[RussianSensation]

Neither lost. Swiftech never went to court, they yanked the cooler from the US. Coolit is still in battle with Asetek, filling their own patent claims.

You can still readily buy those designs, and neither are paying Asetek a royalty. Again, you were wrong. The sole reason isn't because the pump is placed on the mounting plate.

The only company found infringing was Coolermaster. The reason is more than obvious looking at the products they put out that were affected.

/ of my discussion with you on this topic. I cannot be bothered to waste my time when someone is illiterate in reading comprehension, makes up a side argument that wasn't even in contention around the main topic, and ignores evidence even when they are presented with such directly from Asetek's Press Release on this issue.

Infraction issued for personal attack.
-- stahlhart

 

[railven]

/ of my discussion with you on this topic. I cannot be bothered to waste my time when someone is illiterate in reading comprehension, makes up a side argument that wasn't even in contention around the main topic, and ignores evidence even when they are presented with factual evidence directly from Asetek themselves.

That's fine, you don't have to insult me, but I only contested what you said, and even provided you two examples that didn't get involved in the lawsuits.

 

[SirPauly]

That's fine, you don't have to insult me, but I only contested what you said, and even provided you two examples that didn't get involved in the lawsuits.

I never understood the vocal advocates for a reference water cool design especially a third party design to boot. Spinning this as innovation and moving forward. This isn't surprising from asetech.

 

[Techhog]

I never understood the vocal advocates for a reference water cool design especially a third party design to boot. Spinning this as innovation and moving forward. This isn't surprising from asetech.

You guys were going to complain no matter what AMD did for their reference design, so it makes sense to just go with what works.

 

[boozzer]

Why? You do realize it benefits them not us. If the suppliers have to pay licensing fees, and if AMD/NV/Intel have to pay licensing fees for GPU cooling designs with heatpipes and block mounted on top of the GPU, guess who is paying those costs over time? We are. Those costs will be passed onto the consumer.

that was a slight dig on assetek, cause I want them to lose.

I personally hate the current patent system, it is basically allowing legal monopolies.

 

[SirPauly]

You guys were going to complain no matter what AMD did for their reference design, so it makes sense to just go with what works.

I surely didn't make the decision to outsource a third party cooler and sell it as innovation, vocal advocates and AMD did.

 

[iiiankiii]

Neither lost. Swiftech never went to court, they yanked the cooler from the US. Coolit is still in battle with Asetek, filling their own patent claims.

You can still readily buy those designs, and neither are paying Asetek a royalty. Again, you were wrong. The sole reason isn't because the pump is placed on the mounting plate.

The only company found infringing was Coolermaster. The reason is more than obvious looking at the products they put out that were affected.

Dude, c'mon, man. Read what he linked. Jesus Christ.

 

[sandorski]

I surely didn't make the decision to outsource a third party cooler and sell it as innovation, vocal advocates and AMD did.

I am pretty sure all coolers are third party, aka made by a third party for Nvidia or AMD.

 

[Silverforce11]

I honestly had no idea you can patent something as stupid as that.

dude you didnt follow Apple patents?

a smartphone with rounded edges.

the swipe motion.

flicking to flick the page over...

some of the most ridiculous patents ever.

 

[96Firebird]

I wonder how the Nvidia fanboys would be reacting if Nvidia were directly affected instead of just AMD and one niche Gigabyte card. :/

I wonder how this post contributes to this thread at all... :\

 

[Azix]

dude you didnt follow Apple patents?

a smartphone with rounded edges.

the swipe motion.

flicking to flick the page over...

some of the most ridiculous patents ever.

when you think about it, they could actually patent how books work. Flip page to read next page as opposed to lifting off the page to reveal the next page. binding the side vs loose pages.

 

[dark zero]

This isn't only about AMD, Gigabyte waterforce GTX 980 is also in the sight.

And the 980 Ti with water cooling is in danger.... nVIDIA will do something with AMD to prevent this.... maybe Intel is helping Asetek this time...

 

[jj109]

And the 980 Ti with water cooling is in danger.... nVIDIA will do something with AMD to prevent this.... maybe Intel is helping Asetek this time...

The watercooled 980 Ti from EVGA and Corsair are using AIOs with integrated pump/cold plate manufactured by Asetek, so no problem there.

And LOL @ RS calling Asetek a "patent troll". Way to dilute the term.