Intel Wins Jury Trial Over Patent Licenses In $3 Billion VLSI Fight (reuters.com) 22
A Texas jury ruled that Intel may hold a license to patents owned by VLSI Technology through its agreement with Finjan Inc., both controlled by Fortress Investment Group -- potentially nullifying over $3 billion in previous patent infringement verdicts against Intel. Reuters reports: VLSI has sued Intel in multiple U.S. courts for allegedly infringing several patents covering semiconductor technology. A jury in Waco, Texas awarded VLSI $2.18 billion in their first trial in 2021, which a U.S. appeals court has since overturned and sent back for new proceedings.
An Austin, Texas jury determined that VLSI was entitled to nearly $949 million from Intel in a separate patent infringement trial in 2022. Intel has argued in that case that the verdicts should be thrown out based on a 2012 agreement that gave it a license to patents owned by Finjan and other companies "under common control" with it. U.S. District Judge Alan Albright held the latest jury trial in Austin to determine whether Finjan and VLSI were under the "common control" of Fortress. VLSI said it was not subject to the Finjan agreement, and that the company did not even exist until four years after it was signed.
An Austin, Texas jury determined that VLSI was entitled to nearly $949 million from Intel in a separate patent infringement trial in 2022. Intel has argued in that case that the verdicts should be thrown out based on a 2012 agreement that gave it a license to patents owned by Finjan and other companies "under common control" with it. U.S. District Judge Alan Albright held the latest jury trial in Austin to determine whether Finjan and VLSI were under the "common control" of Fortress. VLSI said it was not subject to the Finjan agreement, and that the company did not even exist until four years after it was signed.
How big is a "Billino?" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A billino can't be very big if it only costs $3. I'm surprised that anyone bothered prosecuting a lawsuit all the way to its conclusion over such a small dollar amount.
Re:How big is a "Billino?" (Score:4, Informative)
Billinos tastes great and at $3 per billino, it's both affordable and nutritious.
Re: How big is a "Billino?" (Score:2)
Meh, the noodles are overcooked and the tomato sauce is kind of bland.
Re: (Score:2)
Billinos are typically considered loss-leaders - a means of getting you in the door so they can hopefully sell you other (profitable) items as well. In that respect they're a lot like those $1.50 hot dogs at the Costco food court.
Re:How big is a "Billino?" (Score:4, Funny)
The president is getting his daily briefing. "Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed."
"OH NO!" the President exclaims. "That's terrible!"
His staff sits stunned at this display of emotion, nervously watching as the President sits, head in hands.
Finally, the President looks up and asks, "How many is a brazillion?"
Texas = Nothing But Trouble (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Texas = Nothing But Trouble (Score:1)
They also exist to produce oil and dump it in the Gulf.
Re: (Score:1)
So frustrating that Texas mainly exists to host courts where the rule of law is destroyed, whether in terms of constitutional fast-tracking to get cases in front of Alito and Thomas, or these patent parasites. (Obligatory link: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0... [imdb.com])
These types of jury trials are essentially biased samplings of juries that are intentionally crafted to be ignorant, unintelligent, and pliable. There is a statistical distribution of decisions from potential juries, and two different juries hearing the exact same case will likely not return the same verdict with the same vote margin. Yet, our legal system allows this system to determine the fate of billions of dollars and the livelihoods of many people. Seems like the underlying problem is with this par
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like your argument simplifies to "Texas juries consist of gullible idiots who rule based on the skill of the lawyers rather than on facts" which simplifies to "Texans are gullible idiots". Also "SCOTUS rules based on ideologies rather than on facts and on the constitution."
This is a strong condemnation of both Texans and of the SCOTUS justices. But... this seems well supported by reality. I'm sad but have to agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like your argument simplifies to "Texas juries consist of gullible idiots who rule based on the skill of the lawyers rather than on facts" which simplifies to "Texans are gullible idiots". Also "SCOTUS rules based on ideologies rather than on facts and on the constitution."
This is a strong condemnation of both Texans and of the SCOTUS justices. But... this seems well supported by reality. I'm sad but have to agree with you.
Actually I wasn't pointing fingers specifically at Texas juries, as I believe all juries have these flaws. The lawyers specifically try to empanel juries that are ignorant, unintelligent, and pliable. Being ignorant and unintelligent help with being pliable. And this is not just restricted to these civil cases, as criminal juries have the same flaws.
Re: Texas = Nothing But Trouble (Score:2)
Re: unpopular? (Score:2)
All I needed to read was (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If you read the summary you'd discover that this was a jury trial.
Re: All I needed to read was (Score:2)
I think you might need to read up on the general judicial tenor of the Fifth Circuit. If there's anybody "usually overturned," it's the good judges you're pining for. Even if the Supreme Court were inclined to fix more of it, their selective docket just isn't big enough.
Re: (Score:2)