Min menu


Intel owes $2.18 billion for patent infringement


 A Texas jury has asked Intel to pay $2.18 billion for violating VLSI Technology-owned patents after losing a trial over chip-related technology.

This means that Intel owes a large amount of money to a semiconductor company that has not existed for 20 years.

A federal jury said Intel violated VLSI-owned patents, and the jury charged $1.5 billion for one patent violation and $675 million for the second violation.

Intel, the world's largest chipmaker, denied violating any of the patents, saying that one of them was invalid because it claimed to cover the work of Intel engineers, but the jury rejected these arguments.

The patents were owned by Dutch chipmaker NXP, which receives a portion of any damages, Intel's William Lee attorney William Lee told jurors in closing arguments.

He told me: VLSI, founded four years ago, does not have the only potential products and revenues are this suit, VLSI used patents that have not been used for 10 years, and this amount would exhaust real innovators.

One patent was originally issued in 2012 for Freescale, while the other was issued in 2010 for SigmaTel.

Freescale bought SigmaTel, which was also purchased from NXP in 2015, and in this case, transferred the patent to VLSI in 2019.

"Patents cover inventions that increase the power and speed of processors, a key competition issue," said Morgan Chu, a lawyer for VLSI.

He said that federal law does not require anyone to know the patent until it is proven that it violated it, and Intel did not deliberately look to see if it was using someone else's inventions, and accused it of intentional blindness.

VLSI's lawyer explained that the amount is not too high when billions of chips sold by Intel are taken into account.

He said Intel paid MicroUnity $300 million in 2005 and Invidia $1.5 billion in 2011, although the settlement, in this case, included a cross-technology license.

Intel sought to adjourn the case because of the epidemic, but District Court Judge Alan Albright rejected the request.