Why Are CPU-designers so obsessed (and proud) of their patents?
For example if you read about Chuck Moore's Green Array or Ivan Godard's Mill architecture they quickly point out that their designs are protected by patents. And the other day while taking out the trash I had a conversation with my next-door neighbor in Menlo Park who was some early Intel employee and he was talking my ear off about finally getting some lawsuit through some hurdle to get some small company to stop using some obscure design he had long after leaving Intel. I just nodding and smiled and went back into my house.
I don't understand this way of thinking. I can't imagine chatting with a programming and having them quickly start talking about their awesome patents. Is there something about the hardware world that I just don't understand?
2 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 16.7 ms ] threadSince AMD and Intel have both made major contributions to the x86 platform, this situation continues. This duopoly has also worked to the detriment of Cyrix, VIA, Transmeta and everyone else who has tried to break into the x86 space.
Patents are a mainstay of anything that involves physical manufacturing because they let you contract out to a manufacturer without the fear that the manufacturer will produce the product on their own account and cut you out.
For instance, this patent
https://www.google.com/patents/US4560358
let the inventor (a "non-practicing entity") outsource manufacturing and marketing to third parties without a fear of getting ripped off and offering those third parties a chance to have a unique product.