Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
"NLST IMO the most important thing that is coming from this case at its conclusion on Friday is that there will be a press release showing to the world that Samsung had to pay damages to NetList. whatever that damage amount is does not matter as much as everyone will be on notice that Samsung does not have a patent license to this technology. This has already been confirmed by Samsung's own admission and the fact that Google and Lenovo have already sought indemnification! Samsung needs a license yesterday! By the end of this week everyone will know and the main thing I am looking for from this trial personally is Dr. Akeman's testimony. this is the reason why the Google legal team wanted to wait on Discovery until after the Samsung case. patent value can most likely be established by looking at Doctor Akeman's testimony on damages. The breach-of-contract is only going to be direct damages related to the difference between buying the product direct from Samsung or from a reseller. that number can be worked backwards to establish full value! I think that is why Jason Shaesby was in this the whole time. he is probably already crunching numbers. that number doesn't need to be very much per unit when it is worked backward to its full value. then multiplied times X number of modules times millions of servers x number of years. this breach of contract case is the key that is going to open the door." BolliverShagnasty @ StockTwits
Yes. This one it too public, too blatant. Everyone knows backroom deals happen and they are disliked but have to be tolerated because solid proof isn't easy to come by. But this is brazen. Letting them off would be "in your face" proof and it would cause outrage from everyone, no matter how they voted. One of the few things politically polarized voters would agree on is that big corporations cannot piss on the law and be allowed to walk all over smaller businesses and steal their property without penalty. This goes back to remembering the bully on the playground who stole and broke other kids toys. It's a deep seated, gut reaction.
If so, that still leaves a lot that is deductible for them. This entire saga isn't going to be nearly as damaging to them as many believe. They are just too big and they can spread it out.
ESPECIALLY since Samsung and Google can take the legal expenses and any money paid to NetList as a business loss and take it off their taxes.
The payout, even by the most optimistic estimates, isn't going to hurt either company. It might sting a little, but their stock won't even go down. It'll probably go up as investors will likely see it as a problem settled and out of the way.
So just how would they make the litigation go away? The cases are well established and there has been plenty of publicity. Suddenly the court just throws out everything?
Lee Jae-yong is still on parole for his bribery conviction in South Korea. If, after meeting with government officials, there were suddenly government action to make NetList go away then it would be obvious someone had struck a corrupt deal. It would be picnic for the press. IMO being scared of this is about the same as being scared of an asteroid strike.
That has yet to be determined.
Interesting. Could be simply a move to prevent NetList mentioning the criminal past of their Vice Chairman and his father the former Chief Operating Officer of Samsung. NetList really could make a point of establishing a company culture of ignoring the law. I can just see Exhibit A "twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy pictures with circles and arrows" etc. Samsung does seem very protective of their executives.
We still have Samsung briefs today.
The paperwork says that it is due to the unavailability of the judge.
I just hope she is OK. Wouldn't want another judge at this point. The current one is very familiar with this case.
I agree. It's all a bluff. Google may be the 400 lb gorilla, but, in the end, they answer to their shareholders. I can't see them telling Vanguard, BlackRock and T.Rowe Price that they spent a huge amount of money out of spite, when there was another option that was both cheaper, faster, and easier. It's business after all and the big funds don't give a flip about feelings versus the bottom line.
I really wonder how they're going to "dispose" of everything. Go into the boards, pry out the chips, and solder in new ones? The servers won't accept a chip they aren't engineered to have. Won't even accept a whole new board that they aren't designed to work with. They'll end up having to replace the server itself because the only thing they could keep is the frame and maybe a few peripherals. They could certainly do it, but at what expense?
Seems like it would be way more economical to just pay a licensing fee, legalizing the stolen tech, and seamlessly continue using what has worked well for them for the past 12 years.
There is no way a licensing fee for the NLST tech in a server is going to cost more than an entire new server. That is just a ridiculously stupid threat, made by some lawyer who is obviously ignorant, and it isn't fooling anyone. This is the equivalent of a kid threatening to hold his breath until he gets what he wants.
Then there is Inphi. Why did NetList drop the case? Speculation is that Marvell, who bought Inphi, wanted no part in a lawsuit not of their making and provided proof of collusion, that could be used against GOOG, in return for being removed from the naughty list. It's pure speculation, but certainly possible. Not long after that the word "Collusion" started appearing in the motions of NetList.
Judging by the patent number they are utility patents. There is no "D" before the patent number.
HybriDIMM will help the speed issue. Google can't get that without buying it and they'll have to or lose market share.
http://s2.q4cdn.com/000096926/files/doc_downloads/BigData-v5.pdf
You are most welcome. Don't worry. Everyone is new at some point.
There really is no way to tell a percentage. It will eventually all come out in the various court cases, but it will take a while. It's been a popular pastime on some boards to speculate, but nobody has all the data needed to make an accurate estimate.
It looks like the 912 patent is a utility patent. I believe design patents have a "D" preceding the number.
https://investors.netlist.com/websites/netlist/English/2120/us-press-release.html?airportNewsID=c90a7e0d-8ee9-4643-9705-e7a94187bf64
"A Samsung server, for example, cannot use a chip from Intel." I should have specified that it can't use that chip unless it's designed to. It can't be just changed out. It won't work.
I have no problem with you trying to learn. I think it's great, in fact.
I apologize if I gave any other impression.
IP is intellectual property. The microprocessors NetList developed were patented and those patents are IP. Everyone out there making product that uses the specs in the patents belonging to NetList owes them money for licensing. SKHynix, Macron, Samsung, Inphi, all those companies,and more, which supply a huge amount of the world's microprocessors, have used NetList patents without paying a licensing fee. I think you will be very surprised when you get a firm grasp of the scale of the situation.
It took ten years for NetList to get their patents validated by the US Patent and Trademark office. That's a very long time in the computer industry. During that time period those patents were used by companies to manufacture and develop an awful lot of different microprocessors. Everyone thought NetList would go out of business and the patents would become public domain, meaning there would be no consequences. Well, they did not go out of business and now there is hell to pay.
When someone bases an invention on the foundation of something, that has been patented before, then they infringe on the first patent unless they obtain a license or permission or unless the patent is public domain. "New and improved" still owes its invention to the first incarnation. So even though a microprocessor may have been developed by another company, if they used the principles in the NetList patents then they owe NetList a fee. Even though the name and version may be different on a microprocessor, its "parentage", so to speak, is likely NetList. That is what they stole and used freely for ten years.Remember Qualcomm and their cellular patents? This is the equivalent. NetList technology, having been freely used for a decade, is now so ingrained throughout the industry that most, high speed, server memory products have NetList in their family tree.
Fun fact: Servers do not have interchangeable microprocessors or modules. A Samsung server, for example, cannot use a chip from Intel. Upgrading using anything else but components built by Samsung isn't possible. I was really surprised to learn this.
Take a look at http://googlecheatednetlist.com/ Though it hasn't been updated in a while it's a good site and there are some articles noted at the bottom that are fairly comprehensive.
I hope this helps. I'm not a computer industry insider so if there are any mistakes in this explanation please forgive me.
Samsung can't get the seminal products anywhere else. Nowhere. If they could they would have just gone back and forth on the price with NetList like you can do when you have two or more suppliers for the same product.
Instead they stole it. Same with Google, SKHynix, Macron and all the others. If there were another supplier out there nobody would have been using stolen IP. And when HybriDIMM hits the market they'll have to license that too because there is nothing comparable. Their server components won't be competitive without it.
Microprocessors are not easy to design, especially if you have to reinvent the wheel, and not build on what is already out there, in order to avoid patent infringement. It's FAR easier to just pay a license fee and not have to go through the years of development and testing.
Their patents are all meaningful and widely used. However, the 912 patent is a "seminal patent". Which is "an invention so impactful that it creates or shifts the technology space."
Eventually something else will come along and supplant it, that's how tech works. But it isn't going to be soon and it isn't likely that it will be done without building on already existing patents that NetList has. NetList isn't resting on their laurels either. They are continuing to engineer newer and better chips. Their partnership with SK Hynix will get HybriDIMM to market. IMO it's a great company for a very, long-term investment.
From NetList's site:
"Netlist provides high-performance SSDs and modular memory subsystems to enterprise customers in diverse industries. Flagship products NVvault® and EXPRESSvaultâ„¢ enable customers to accelerate data in their servers and storage and reliably protect enterprise-level cache, metadata and log data in the event of a system failure or power outage. HybriDIMMâ„¢, Netlist's next-generation storage class memory product, addresses the growing need for real-time analytics in Big Data applications, in-memory databases, high-performance computing and advanced data storage solutions. Netlist also manufactures and provides a line of specialty and legacy memory products to storage customers, appliance customers, system builders and cloud and data center customers. Netlist holds a portfolio of patents, many seminal, in the areas of hybrid memory, storage class memory, rank multiplication and load reduction. To learn more, visit www.netlist.com."
Why do you feel that IQST is the scam of the year? I'd appreciate seeing the information you're basing this on, or hearing why you think this way. Information, bad or good, is essential to good DD.
I doubt it'll impact them very much. It certainly should but Samsung is part of a national identity and a source of pride in South Korea. They'll forgive them pretty much anything.
People want to see the money. When damages or a settlement are announced then the price will go up, but even then I don't think it'll go up as much as it should. There are too many people,without a grasp of reality, who are ready to penalize them for settlements that they feel are too low. It's most frustrating.
Well, they didn't outright call the judge stupid but it's implied that they feel he either didn't do his job, or doesn't know how. Way to go Samsung! This is the judge who will be presiding over the jury trial for damages. Irritate him some more, please.
It might be a cultural issue, but their lawyers are American and should have told them that all this was against their own best interests. Perhaps they ignored their advice. Perhaps there was no advice. Hopefully they'll learn from their mistakes but I'm somewhat pessimistic.
Perhaps they were simply arrogant. Seems unlikely, but it's certainly possible.
They may have also been motivated by the possibility of losing face. Which, ironically, they did by dragging this thing out.
Could also be plain and simple greed.
Unless they settle first. It would be stupid not to settle now. They lost and the discovery is damning. Juries tend to sympathize with David, not Goliath. Even more so when it's proven that Goliath is a deliberate jerk who tried to drive David out of business.
I see now. Well, if they are using NetList tech then it's just extra royalties.
I must be missing something. Maybe the link changed on the Yahoo end. The end link is to a Yahoo article that says Micron is considering building a chip factory. What is there for NetList to approve?
Yes. Very exciting. Except for the boring part. Waiting on the legal resolutions.
They are incorporated in Delaware.
Samsung would be smart to settle ASAP. It's only going to get more expensive for them, if they delay.
But then, if they were smart, they wouldn't be in the situation they are in right now.
Can this, and the one for Google, become stickies please?
Purposely. Their market studies told them that a "retro" look is what people in their target market like/want.
They have indicated that changing the looks is something that they are ready to do when the market wants it.
That line of thinking by Google hasn't worked very well for them so far.
Ran across this today and posted it to reddit. Thought I'd post it here too for the people who don't visit reddit.
It's three months old, but the time period it talks about is very much still valid. My apologies if it's already been posted and I missed it.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/report-server-chip-shortage-worsens-as-intel-amd-in-tight-supply
Certainly would be nice. He has as much chance of being correct as any other prediction I've seen. I think technical traders will acknowledge that emotion and FOMO both can play a big part in any run.
Then you need glasses.