Slashdot Log In
Seagate Sues STEC For Patent Infringement
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Apr 15, 2008 02:18 PM
from the hey-at-least-it's-not-a-software-patent dept.
from the hey-at-least-it's-not-a-software-patent dept.
Lucas123 writes "Yesterday Seagate filed suit against STEC, claiming several of its products, including solid state disks and some DRAM devices, infringe as many as four of its patents. Today STEC responded that it holds patents on the technology 10 years older than Seagate's. A Seagate win in the suit, or a settlement, could result in the equivalent of a tax on SSDs and potentially other flash memory products, increasing prices to end users at a time when demand for SSD storage is exploding."
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: SSD Prices On Parity With High-End HDD By 2011 106 comments
kgagne writes "EMC executives were heavily pitching the virtues of solid state disk drives at their annual users conference in Las Vegas, saying that SSD will not only be on price parity with high-end Fibre Channel disk drives by the end of 2010 or early 2011, but that NAND memory will solve all sorts of read/write issues created by spinning disk technology. EMC's CEO and its storage platforms chief said the company will do everything it can to drive SSD prices down, and adoption up, by deploying them in their products. One issue might be that EMC is using SSD from STEC, which is being sued by Seagate for patent infringement." The article also mentions some of the work EMC has been doing to make sure SSD is enterprise-class reliable, such as developing "wear leveling" software.
[+]
Hardware: Seagate Announces First SSD, 2TB HDD 118 comments
Lucas123 writes "Seagate CEO Bill Watkins said today that the company plans to put out its first solid state disk drive next year as well as a 2TB version of its Barracuda hard disk drive. Watkins also alluded to Seagate's inevitable move from spinning disk to solid state drives, but emphasized it will be years away, saying the storage market is driven by cost-per-gigabyte and though SSDs provide benefits such as power savings, they won't be in laptops in the next few years. A 128GB SSD costs $460, or $3.58 per gigabyte, compared to $60 for a 160GB hard drive, according to Krishna Chander, an analyst at iSuppli. 'It will take three to four years for SSDs to come to parity with hard drives,' on price and reliability."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.

Aw crap! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Aw crap! (Score:5, Informative)
Seagate fears the market potential STEC has. The simplest path is to litigate STEC to death over patents or trademark.
It's happened to every small company I've worked for. Most of them closed up shop because the big fish buried them in Trademark and Patent litigation over and over again.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Seagate probably looked at the market and just randomly picked one to go after. Or they looked for the one they thought was the weakest and would cave into demands for a licensing agreement.
The Seagate lawyers probably didn't do their due diligence wh
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Seagate scared (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Resorting to patent lawsuits is NOT a sign of a confident/competent tech company. There's a good chance this will cause a backlash if it fails, which in my opinion is what Seagate richly
Re:Seagate scared DELAY EXPLAINED (Score:3, Interesting)
He just didn't know which possible patents he could throw against it at the time and didn't want to be questioned on that point. Now he believes he knows that answer.
I can see the humour in this. (Score:2)
I had a 20MB SSD from 1996 (Score:2)
Clearly, protecting the innovator (Score:5, Funny)
Hang on. Seagate. Right.
Oh, this must be one of those very rare cases where patents don't act in the interests of society.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Patent are there to help the patent holder, regardless of size. They make it easier for the little guy to get into or start a market.
If Seagate has a patent, then they should gt compensation.
This is the patent system working fine.
Yes, it ne
Re: (Score:2)
Given these two conditions, patents most definitely do NOT make it easier for th
STEC's Official Response (Score:3, Informative)
STEC believes that Seagate's action is a desperate move to disrupt how aggressively customers are embracing STEC's Zeus-IOPS technology and changing the balance of power in enterprise storage.
QFT
The USPTO is broken. full. stop. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are found to be stifling innovation by using patents to block innovators... well, say good bye to ALL your patents in the next 7 years. At least any patents that look similar to the one in question. Say, all your hard drive patents.
Patents are meant to protect, not be used to bludgeon your competition into bankruptcy. If you misuse them... nach!, all your patents are belong to the public domain.
It's time that this stupid use of patents was brought to an end.
Sure, my suggestion has some issues, but every solution less than 100 pages long does. The idea is what I'm offering, not the fine details.
Re: (Score:2)
Just out of curiosity, did you patent the idea?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because anybody can get money, market, and get something to the public in a year.
Does your ignorance know no bounds?
If someone violates your patent and can not bear the court case from do
Re: (Score:2)
pretty good bet that you didn't invest much into it either. Patents are meant to
encourage disclosure of things that are useful and presumably difficult to come
up with.
It should
Re:The USPTO is broken. full. stop. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, if you do not act fast, you can lose the patent to the public domain. Of course, if you truly have something that is innovative and non-obvious it will not readily be 'also invented' by someone else.
The patent system was created to deal with commerce and innovation of 500+ years ago. Do I need tell you about the contrast between then and now?
Technology based patents are useless in about 5 years; nearly worthless in 3. Anything longer than 7 years is gratuitous. Yes, I believe that there should be levels of patents issued. If your technology is truly innovative and paradigm shifting, ok, 21 years. It's not so if all you did was change the color (colour) or connector.
There no longer is a one size fits all schema. If you want a business process patent, I'm okay with that, but you only get 2 years from date of issue, after that it goes to public domain.
Oh, genetic patents... nach! not getting them. If you think your soybean seeds are better than nature has created, prove it by selling more without a patent. Absolutely no patents on anything that nature created: all you are doing is changing the color or connector. period. no. joking.
And to answer your point, if you are working on something and can show valid reason to have the patent longer, so it will be. If you have nothing, that is EXACTLY what you are leaving the courtroom with.
Parent
Re:The USPTO is broken. full. stop. (Score:4, Insightful)
So I wish Seagate good luck in defending their business. Because the next company they will have to target will be Samsung and this will not be a walk in the park.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Totally wrong. Cheap SSD flash drives put a bunch of flash chips behind one controller. They can do maybe 100 random writes per second. More expensive ones have multiple controllers that run in para
Patent Infrignment (Score:2, Funny)
Penalty for abuse of the courts urgently needed. (Score:2)
Seagate is Scum (Score:2)
And So It Goes... (Score:3, Interesting)