Yeah the question remains as to whether the Fury X cooler is using the infringing design or not, but if it is an infringing unit, its pretty cut and dry patent infringement. Like I say though, AMD likely has in the contract with CM that in the case of patent infringement the seller must provide a non infringing alternative or buy a license on the buyer's (AMD's) behalf. This is a standard clause in big contracts for things like that. I do this for a living.
The word "direct infringement" is a term of art and has a specific meaning in that context, which is that the alleged infringer's device literally does the things as claimed by the patent without having to combine references under 35 usc 103 (obviousness). Since CM just lost their infringement case on various models of their AIO coolers, if one of those AIO coolers is on the Fury X then using the infringing device is also infringement. 35 usc 271(a). "Indirect infringement" is another term of art which refers to 35 usc 271 (b) and (c) also known as induced infringement and contributory infringement.
An interesting side note since you are reading along, is check on the actual judgment (filing 249), page 5-6 about the experts chosen by both sides to testify. Then check page 16-17. Looks like Asetek picked a really good expert and CM picked an okay one. The judge and jury both gave asetek nearly everything they asked for because their expert seems like he was a lot better. Indicative of how it can all come down to that guy's resume versus the other guy's resume
One may not like patents, but how about this:
Yeah, I saw that pic posted by the asetek sales rep on overclock.net. Then this from later in the thread:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1574682/...y-impacted-by-asetek-lawsuit/90#post_24444604
So that pic is from legitreviews: http://www.legitreviews.com/120mm-water-cooler-round-up-part-2-looking-inside_129601/7
And it is two zalman models taken apart.
Is this the same assumption that because AMD "invented" hbm, they have an exclusivity deal?
Not saying or doubting your expertise. Just saying we've seen AMD make massive missteps, before, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't as airtight of a contract as it needs to be.
10. A cooling system for a computer system, comprising:
a centrifugal pump adapted to circulate a cooling liquid, the pump including:
an impeller exposed to the cooling liquid; and
a stator isolated from the cooling liquid;
a reservoir configured to be thermally coupled to a heat-generating component of the computer system, the reservoir including:
a thermal exchange chamber adapted to be positioned in thermal contact with the heat-generating component;
a separate pump chamber vertically spaced part from the thermal exchange chamber and coupled with the thermal exchange chamber through one or more passages configured for fluid communication between the pump chamber and the thermal exchange chamber, and wherein at least one of the one or more passages is offset from a center of the impeller.
Way to take that comment personally. I have no idea what your personal stance is on hbm exclusivity I was simply drawing a parallel....What are you talking about? I specifically argued they almost certainly do NOT have patent exclusivity due to JEDDEC FRAND provisions and the nature of JEDDEC standards development...
They are a multi billion dollar enterprise. I highly doubt they hired lawyers incompetent enough to leave that provision out, and that negotiation is very rarely won by the seller because the buyer has the negotiation leverage as a potential customer. But if they did leave that out it would be pretty hilarious. I work on the sell side and I've had buyer's presumably competent lawyers leave out that provision, so it does happen. Not usually on deals that big though, as I imagine the CM contract would have to be for millions of dollars. If they left it out, it would be another indicator of incompetence for sure...
They later corrected it that they meant this photo:
They lifted the pic from the wrong page. The correct page is below:
http://www.legitreviews.com/120mm-water-cooler-round-up-part-2-looking-inside_129601/6
The Scythe is the Asetek. The other is in fact the CM design.
Edit: I see your ninja edit.
Hardly ninja given your timestamps. Its called hitting the submit button early without proof reading.
Some Sapphire Fury owners have reported that they were able to unlock 2/4 or even the entire locked units, which confirms that an air cooled Fury X with a solid cooler would be cool and quiet. Therefore, it's not the end of the world if AMD has to release an air cooled Fury X.
Does anyone know the patent number for the Asetek patent?
I wonder if the patent requires specific features of the middle item, the one that is substantially different between the two? For example, the above disc has very small semicircular holes with little posts staggered around it in the rectangular part, but the lower disc has gigantic holes with no staggered posts. If the Asetek patent requires the staggered posts and semicircular holes, perhaps the Coolermaster is a design-around to specifically avoid the patent?
Erm.... Why?
What we want is an air cooled Fury X. Or a SFF style Fury (non X).
TPU Commenter:
Some people want it? Why release gtx 980 kingpin? Some people want it. And since we don't see fury x.... I guess this is the new wc option lol.Yeah. Why release a water cooled Fury? That makes absolutely no sense. What will it cost? $600?
Some people want it? Why release gtx 980 kingpin? Some people want it. And since we don't see fury x.... I guess this is the new wc option lol.