Have you personally evaluated the 37,000 patents TSMC claims it has?
Your post sounds pretty weak to me. One of the things that's most annoying about tech comments is when people post with certainty about things they know next to nothing, or nothing, about.
I mean, am I missing something here? Did he edit his comment after your reply? As far as I can tell, you can't edit your comments here once you've posted them.
Wow - he merely said "some" - and I actually agree (at least in the general description given) - and you extend it to all 37K. Not "well played" at all. That's weak.
Let's look at US 8,581,348 - which is HUGELY weak. It describes having multiple interlinked transistors on a chip. Tell me that isn't weak. . .and yes, I looked at the actual patent (which is linked).
Anyway they will proceed. The patents are few but apparently strategic for manufacturing. In my knowledge. after a weak beginnig after 20nm, TSMC accelerated a lot. There was a lot of free money from Governors and Apple to develop fast new nodes. It is not unlikely they chose the shorter street....but there is one or more Judges behind this in upcoming months
What's interesting about this is that AMD is not named as a defendant. I wonder what the specific reasons for that are?
Is it because AMD is a customer? Is it because AMD has rights/cross-licensing with GF IP? Or is it because they think that taking on AMD would make their case more difficult?
AMD's chiplet cpu code design with Global Foundries core IO chip is both technically ingenious as well as a very saavy business decision to stay engaged with both manufacturers.
It was but they likely AMD need to get that IO die shrunk down for Zen3 and GloFlo has nothing to offer. I say this because the APU's for laptops and tablets won't be competitive to Intel on power draw until that occurs. I see AMD leaving all GloFlo business in 2020.
Likely 2021 or later. AMD IIRC is still producing Zen+ chips for another few months at minimum. They were producing Zen 1 well into the release of Zen 2 and only recently have Zen 1 products disappeared from the market. Current rumors suggest 2021 or 2022 as the year their contract with GloFo expires, which lines up with Zen 4 being launched, Zen 3 entering EOL, and Zen 2 production being stopped. Coincidentally that also will like be the first chip on a new socket, and the first one to support DDR5.
Remember that GF is the merger of Charted semi, AMD's fab, and more recently IBMs fab. So they have all of the above's patents on ic fabrication, and most likely the AMD/IBM have a cross license - so even if they made a chip at TSMC it would be convered, bus somebody else making the same thing at TSMC would not be covered.
and it could just be that GloFo has figured out that ever smaller nodes provide only minimal benefit. after all, we're no longer in the time when Gates always responded to complaints about Windoze: "just let the hardware fix it". 99.44% of folks can do what they need with a Pentium and good broadband. all of the high CPU/GPU uses are ever shrinking niche.
"You think that TSMC 7nm didn't help AMD compared to 12nm from TSMC? "
as, among other things NAND/DRAM, there is no supply-side creating its own demand. the benefit to the majority of computer users from ever smaller nodes is below the noise level. the demand for new smartphones (I'm talkin to your Apple) is drying up. and so forth. do you think that gamers will save the industry? games aren't 1-2-3.
New nodes allow for higher power efficiency and higher transistor density. There is definitely still demand for new nodes. Otherwise why would AMD move to 7nm if it didn't help them make better CPUs? Why are they also moving GPUs to 7nm? Why are qualcomm and apple moving to 7nm for their smartphone SoCs?
That is completely false. Smaller nodes do provide large benefits. Sure at some point this may stop but man you are way off base. When we get to true 5nm using a gate all around approach we will have another huge transistor density jump and you think the engineers will look around and say I have no idea what to do with all of this?
You will see more chip integration like higher end APU's negating many from buying dedicated GPU's. Things like system memory brought on chip. You will see Apple an other make true SoC's with no need for any other chips.
fact: they haven't made anything like the tsunami of demand from 1-2-3 which kicked off the PC generation. and without that demand, ever more transistors becomes a niche business. just read the recent reports on AT about various productions being slowed or halted. don't you think there's a reason for that? much, if not most, of the use of the transistor deluge in the last 15 years has been to bring off-chip function on chip (CPU). that 'innovation' can go only so far. the multi-processor/thread revolution has faded away, modulo a niche or two, just because there aren't a lot of embarrassingly parallel problems in (consumer) user space. what new function(s) do you expect to see in mid-level SoC implementations as a result of yet more transistor availability? what about for retail computers? if the foundries can get more CPU from a wafer with smaller nodes, what does that do to the tool makers? well, it decimates their business model of course. how many 450mm wafer lines are out there, decades after they were supposed to rule?
and so on. John Barth wrote a great book (well, lots of them), "The End of the Road". again, without a clear and demonstrable use for smaller nodes not doable at current nodes...
You seem to believe that the PC industry (throttled by the dead hand of Intel and Microsoft) is the same thing as the semiconductor industry...
Apple has engaged in PLENTY of innovation over the past few years. There are a variety of interesting ways to use transistors on an A12 SoC or in an Apple Watch, or even in Airpods. As for "tsunami of demand", every year about 7 times as many cell phones are sold as PCs. Phones, Wearables, Hearables, IoT, computational photography, smart cars, any of this sound familiar?
The problem is not that " 'we' don't know what to do with all of this "; the problem is that Intel doesn't know WTF it is doing. 'You think that's too harsh? Where are the NPUs on Intel SoCs? When will they get there? 2025? Where has Intel been in providing their portables with sensors? They want you to buy 2-in-1's that can split into a tablet, but an iPad has a range of sensors (location and orientation, fancy ISP for camera, cell modem, ...) whereas Intel has, oh yeah, gutted their modem division, doesn't offer GPS on their x86 SoCs, and no-one's ever heard of their ISP.
Intel gave up on innovation about ten years ago. Everything since then has been same old same old. Even the areas where they want to claim they are innovating, everything they're doing comes from a company they purchased (Nervana, Movidius, Altera) because they didn't have the vision internally to understand that transistors could do more than just x86.
"Apple has engaged in PLENTY of innovation over the past few years. "
as Steve said with the iPhone debut (paraphrasing), it's just 3 existing functions stuffed into one chassis. that's innovation? moving off-chip function on-chip is innovation? VR has gone nowhere. AI is going nowhere. what, exactly, is in need of smaller nodes, and is something other than a toy or mere consolidation of existing function on-chip? I dare you.
"Semiconductor device with transistor local interconnects" sounds generic and vague AF.
"Semiconductor device having contact layer providing electrical connections" this one is so absurd that it becomes funny.
"Introduction of metal impurity to change workfunction of conductive electrodes" so they want monpoly on combining different materials with different electrical properties.
What do TSMC's patents have to do with ridiculously absurd patents listed above?
You're the only one jacking off to the 37000 figure so why don't you present your analysis to us (along with explanation why this matters in the first place, of course)?
Why don't you read the entire patent rather than trying to paste in a single line and acting like you understand technology? Also you can argue that the patent may or may not have been "original enough" to be granted by the USPTO, but it's a fact that this is a patent held by GF. If so then the questions the courts will answer is 1. Was this patent infringed upon and 2. What are the financial damages by said infringement.
Also all the folks in here yelling about how TSMC has 7nm and GF doesn't so it doesn't apply. Please keep in mind FINFET designs aren't size specific. If you make a device and shrink it, it's just a smaller version of the same device. It's still fair game.
Read the patents they are much more specific. For example the 3rd one you mentioned requires Halfnium and that the the process of choosing p or n happen in the same step as a conductive electrode instead of separate steps.
Amounts!!! of Intellectual Property China (and others) have stolen is... well, can't measure it even if you tried your hardest. Not just US but Europe too, ban them completely from selling any tech in US and Europe. These thieves, especially thieving regime of China, continue destroying whole industries by the means of steal-and-copy-counterfeit art. Korea used to be like that as well, and yes some will rush to shout, as if it was a discovery, that TSMC is Taiwanese... really...
I wonder how much, and I worry that everything, have do to with this ill behaviour Chinese mentality. I cannot recall who and how exactly that study, or an experiment rather, was done, (I'm old and my memory can fool me) you must have heard of it. They invited anonymously people of varied nationalities and it was something about the money I think, cash, where they let people take and keep I think some cash. There was some trick to it I cannot remember, but... !!! Surprise surprise, most truthful were Russians.. and Chinese??? the opposite end of the spectrum they were.
So you’re saying that they should be sued because Chinese companies often steal IP, while simultaneously admitting that they aren’t a Chinese company? Nice little contradiction there.
Nearly every major motherboard and graphics card company is based in Taiwan. If Taiwanese companies wanted to steal from the top computer electronics manufacturers, they’d need to steal from other Taiwanese companies.
We are speaking of particular manufacturing technologies, other Taiwanese companies have not relevance here. GF is claiming some IP infringiments of Common Plataform IP patents portfolio. In fact GF is not calling in courts Samsung. Anyway the fast TSMC acceleration in Fin Fet processes development is suspect. Sometimes stealing tech from other Companies halve the developing times. For example China is an artist in this pratice.
ah.. you did not read at all or.. you did not read. I know, I knew some would shout that TSMC is Taiwanese and not Chinese both of which are not the same, to which my proposed implied reply was - yes, they are the same! (do not even bother to ask continental Chinamen for you will get yourself in trouble). And it's that Chinese mentality which is root of the problem. Almost everybody lies but over there in China, everything suggests, it's a "national" issue.
Lastly, I hear you must be young, maybe very very young, you can this one simple thing - ask yourself (home work properly) how old semiconductor industry and about its origins (here you'll learn about places in Asia) and where was and what was China & Taiwan doing... lets say somewhere half way of the evolution of this industry. My man that stuff does not go just 10 or 15 years back!
There is no 'Taiwan'. Only Republic of China and People's Republic of China. Both of them are Chinese and they share characters of Chinese. However, I don't see why this is relevant here.
Newsflash: US and Imperial Germany stole patents from British Empire. Japan and South Korea stole patents from the "West". China stole patents from all of the above. Every advanced industrial nation had a phase when they stole patents and know how from others.
Yes, true, but my man... If steal-copy-counterfeit art is something one can do for a living then China does it on an industrial scale!!
I could tell you guys first-hand real stories but work I do is for public sector and I'm not sure I'm allowed to go into more details which I'd love to do.
"If steal-copy-counterfeit art is something one can do for a living then China does it on an industrial scale!!"
don't get too high on your horse. if red-blooded Americans hadn't stolen virtually everything from the Brits in the 19th century, the USofA would just be another 3rd world country.
No high horse yet you think China is the only one mastered this, just because your "first hand" story. History tells a very different story. Not even a century ago USA steals "on an individual scale", not even half a century ago Japan steals "on an individual scale", merely a couple of decades ago Korea steals "on an individual scale". Just because you are too dumb to understand you don't know everything, doesn't mean none of those happened.
The tendency of knowledge is too spread. Should the western nations pay IP royalties for "stealing" powder from China centuries ago?
Humans are a successfuk species because we are really good at learn from each other and adopting new methods and skills. No dumb law of granting a temporal monopoly over some concept can change that.
TSMC Responds to Lawsuit by GlobalFoundries: Allegations Are Baseless. TSMC has responded to GlobalFoundries accusations of patents infringements. ... The company stresses that it spends billions of dollars on R&D and has been granted 37,000 patents worldwide.
Oh GlobalFoundries, every single member of this site that has followed AMD knows that you were the true culprit in AMD's downfall....and magically when you left...things became amazing. Pathetic attempt of greed when history shows you ain't nothing but a Rambus.
Hopefully in court it will all get resolved. GloFo isn't dumb enough to waste millions on litigation if they don't believe they can prove their claims in court. These cases can go back and forth in court for years. The bottom line is in the end the courts will rule based on evidence not emotion. If GloFo prevails then TSMC will be paying tens or hundreds of millions and they could be forced to terminate sales of certain products. If TSMC wins then GloFo is likely to have to cough up tens of millions so there is no point in filing frivolous lawsuits.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
62 Comments
Back to Article
Marlin1975 - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
Wow, some of those sound pretty weak, and thats just the surface.Makes me think Global Foundries is in worse shape than they are letting on. And I thought they were in pretty bad shape before this lawsuit.
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
Have you personally evaluated the 37,000 patents TSMC claims it has?Your post sounds pretty weak to me. One of the things that's most annoying about tech comments is when people post with certainty about things they know next to nothing, or nothing, about.
Dragonstongue - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Well playedquote-
response Oxford Guy to Martin1975
*drops microphone.. turns & walks away* -end quote
Cakemaster - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
Really? You're going to get all condescending and rude over that? The guy isn't even implying any kind of certainty :(Cakemaster - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
I mean, am I missing something here? Did he edit his comment after your reply? As far as I can tell, you can't edit your comments here once you've posted them.foxmusics - Saturday, August 31, 2019 - link
Well playedSoCalBoomer - Wednesday, September 4, 2019 - link
Wow - he merely said "some" - and I actually agree (at least in the general description given) - and you extend it to all 37K. Not "well played" at all. That's weak.Let's look at US 8,581,348 - which is HUGELY weak. It describes having multiple interlinked transistors on a chip. Tell me that isn't weak. . .and yes, I looked at the actual patent (which is linked).
Gondalf - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Anyway they will proceed. The patents are few but apparently strategic for manufacturing.In my knowledge. after a weak beginnig after 20nm, TSMC accelerated a lot. There was a lot of free money from Governors and Apple to develop fast new nodes.
It is not unlikely they chose the shorter street....but there is one or more Judges behind this in upcoming months
El Sama - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
"majority of chip developers are it slients." Should be "it's clients". Just trying to help.eddman - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
Maybe you should help yourself first? "its", not "it's".El Sama - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
You are correct sir.Oxford Guy - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
tu quoque fallacyeddman - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Mamat Kunem fallacyBedfordTim - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Unfortunately you picked a special case. "It's" is used for it is, while the possessive is "its".twtech - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
What's interesting about this is that AMD is not named as a defendant. I wonder what the specific reasons for that are?Is it because AMD is a customer? Is it because AMD has rights/cross-licensing with GF IP? Or is it because they think that taking on AMD would make their case more difficult?
jeremyshaw - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
All of the above are likely true, but also, AMD is still a current client.spkay31 - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
AMD's chiplet cpu code design with Global Foundries core IO chip is both technically ingenious as well as a very saavy business decision to stay engaged with both manufacturers.FreckledTrout - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
It was but they likely AMD need to get that IO die shrunk down for Zen3 and GloFlo has nothing to offer. I say this because the APU's for laptops and tablets won't be competitive to Intel on power draw until that occurs. I see AMD leaving all GloFlo business in 2020.eek2121 - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
Likely 2021 or later. AMD IIRC is still producing Zen+ chips for another few months at minimum. They were producing Zen 1 well into the release of Zen 2 and only recently have Zen 1 products disappeared from the market. Current rumors suggest 2021 or 2022 as the year their contract with GloFo expires, which lines up with Zen 4 being launched, Zen 3 entering EOL, and Zen 2 production being stopped. Coincidentally that also will like be the first chip on a new socket, and the first one to support DDR5.drexnx - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
more likely the APUs will be 1 ccx monolithics entirely on 7nm vs. a seperate IO die and chiplets.laptops don't need anywhere near as much IO
stevechipgfxguy - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
Remember that GF is the merger of Charted semi, AMD's fab, and more recently IBMs fab. So they have all of the above's patents on ic fabrication, and most likely the AMD/IBM have a cross license - so even if they made a chip at TSMC it would be convered, bus somebody else making the same thing at TSMC would not be covered.haukionkannel - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Yep. That is the reason!They allready have rights to these patents.
MandiEd - Saturday, August 31, 2019 - link
I wonder if IBM is behind of this patent trolling. TSMC already declined IBM's offer of technology sharing and IBM is in bed with both GF and Samsung.levizx - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
AMD can't infringe GloFo's patents.linuxgeex - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
AMD is a client and they mix Glofo and TSMC wafers in products, so blocking Glofo for AMD would serve to block their own product stream lol.azfacea - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
NOW we know why GF was selling assets. its not re-inventing to become "speciality manufacturer" its re-inventing as a patent troll.Orange_Swan - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
an unnerving thought.FunBunny2 - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
and it could just be that GloFo has figured out that ever smaller nodes provide only minimal benefit. after all, we're no longer in the time when Gates always responded to complaints about Windoze: "just let the hardware fix it". 99.44% of folks can do what they need with a Pentium and good broadband. all of the high CPU/GPU uses are ever shrinking niche.Targon - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
You think that TSMC 7nm didn't help AMD compared to 12nm from TSMC?FunBunny2 - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
"You think that TSMC 7nm didn't help AMD compared to 12nm from TSMC? "as, among other things NAND/DRAM, there is no supply-side creating its own demand. the benefit to the majority of computer users from ever smaller nodes is below the noise level. the demand for new smartphones (I'm talkin to your Apple) is drying up. and so forth. do you think that gamers will save the industry? games aren't 1-2-3.
Dr. Swag - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
New nodes allow for higher power efficiency and higher transistor density. There is definitely still demand for new nodes. Otherwise why would AMD move to 7nm if it didn't help them make better CPUs? Why are they also moving GPUs to 7nm? Why are qualcomm and apple moving to 7nm for their smartphone SoCs?FreckledTrout - Tuesday, August 27, 2019 - link
That is completely false. Smaller nodes do provide large benefits. Sure at some point this may stop but man you are way off base. When we get to true 5nm using a gate all around approach we will have another huge transistor density jump and you think the engineers will look around and say I have no idea what to do with all of this?You will see more chip integration like higher end APU's negating many from buying dedicated GPU's. Things like system memory brought on chip. You will see Apple an other make true SoC's with no need for any other chips.
FunBunny2 - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
"I have no idea what to do with all of this?"fact: they haven't made anything like the tsunami of demand from 1-2-3 which kicked off the PC generation. and without that demand, ever more transistors becomes a niche business. just read the recent reports on AT about various productions being slowed or halted. don't you think there's a reason for that? much, if not most, of the use of the transistor deluge in the last 15 years has been to bring off-chip function on chip (CPU). that 'innovation' can go only so far. the multi-processor/thread revolution has faded away, modulo a niche or two, just because there aren't a lot of embarrassingly parallel problems in (consumer) user space. what new function(s) do you expect to see in mid-level SoC implementations as a result of yet more transistor availability? what about for retail computers? if the foundries can get more CPU from a wafer with smaller nodes, what does that do to the tool makers? well, it decimates their business model of course. how many 450mm wafer lines are out there, decades after they were supposed to rule?
and so on. John Barth wrote a great book (well, lots of them), "The End of the Road". again, without a clear and demonstrable use for smaller nodes not doable at current nodes...
name99 - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
You seem to believe that the PC industry (throttled by the dead hand of Intel and Microsoft) is the same thing as the semiconductor industry...Apple has engaged in PLENTY of innovation over the past few years. There are a variety of interesting ways to use transistors on an A12 SoC or in an Apple Watch, or even in Airpods.
As for "tsunami of demand", every year about 7 times as many cell phones are sold as PCs.
Phones, Wearables, Hearables, IoT, computational photography, smart cars, any of this sound familiar?
The problem is not that " 'we' don't know what to do with all of this "; the problem is that Intel doesn't know WTF it is doing.
'You think that's too harsh? Where are the NPUs on Intel SoCs? When will they get there? 2025?
Where has Intel been in providing their portables with sensors? They want you to buy 2-in-1's that can split into a tablet, but an iPad has a range of sensors (location and orientation, fancy ISP for camera, cell modem, ...) whereas Intel has, oh yeah, gutted their modem division, doesn't offer GPS on their x86 SoCs, and no-one's ever heard of their ISP.
Intel gave up on innovation about ten years ago. Everything since then has been same old same old. Even the areas where they want to claim they are innovating, everything they're doing comes from a company they purchased (Nervana, Movidius, Altera) because they didn't have the vision internally to understand that transistors could do more than just x86.
FunBunny2 - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
"Apple has engaged in PLENTY of innovation over the past few years. "as Steve said with the iPhone debut (paraphrasing), it's just 3 existing functions stuffed into one chassis. that's innovation? moving off-chip function on-chip is innovation? VR has gone nowhere. AI is going nowhere. what, exactly, is in need of smaller nodes, and is something other than a toy or mere consolidation of existing function on-chip? I dare you.
Vitor - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
"Semiconductor device with transistor local interconnects" sounds generic and vague AF."Semiconductor device having contact layer providing electrical connections" this one is so absurd that it becomes funny.
"Introduction of metal impurity to change workfunction of conductive electrodes" so they want monpoly on combining different materials with different electrical properties.
Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
I hope the comments system here is able to handle your analysis of TSMC's 37,000 patents.Arnulf - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
What do TSMC's patents have to do with ridiculously absurd patents listed above?You're the only one jacking off to the 37000 figure so why don't you present your analysis to us (along with explanation why this matters in the first place, of course)?
Nebuzaradan - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Why don't you read the entire patent rather than trying to paste in a single line and acting like you understand technology? Also you can argue that the patent may or may not have been "original enough" to be granted by the USPTO, but it's a fact that this is a patent held by GF. If so then the questions the courts will answer is 1. Was this patent infringed upon and 2. What are the financial damages by said infringement.Also all the folks in here yelling about how TSMC has 7nm and GF doesn't so it doesn't apply. Please keep in mind FINFET designs aren't size specific. If you make a device and shrink it, it's just a smaller version of the same device. It's still fair game.
errorr - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Read the patents they are much more specific. For example the 3rd one you mentioned requires Halfnium and that the the process of choosing p or n happen in the same step as a conductive electrode instead of separate steps.lejeczek - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Absolutely sue them yes!!!!Amounts!!! of Intellectual Property China (and others) have stolen is...
well, can't measure it even if you tried your hardest. Not just US but
Europe too, ban them completely from selling any tech in US and Europe.
These thieves, especially thieving regime of China, continue destroying
whole industries by the means of steal-and-copy-counterfeit art.
Korea used to be like that as well, and yes some will rush to shout, as if it was a discovery, that TSMC is Taiwanese... really...
I wonder how much, and I worry that everything, have do to with this ill behaviour Chinese mentality. I cannot recall who and how exactly that study, or an experiment rather, was done, (I'm old and my memory can fool me) you must have heard of it. They invited anonymously people of varied nationalities and it was something about the money I think, cash, where they let people take and keep I think some cash. There was some trick to it I cannot remember, but... !!! Surprise surprise, most truthful were Russians.. and Chinese??? the opposite end of the spectrum they were.
Guspaz - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
So you’re saying that they should be sued because Chinese companies often steal IP, while simultaneously admitting that they aren’t a Chinese company? Nice little contradiction there.Nearly every major motherboard and graphics card company is based in Taiwan. If Taiwanese companies wanted to steal from the top computer electronics manufacturers, they’d need to steal from other Taiwanese companies.
Gondalf - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
We are speaking of particular manufacturing technologies, other Taiwanese companies have not relevance here. GF is claiming some IP infringiments of Common Plataform IP patents portfolio.In fact GF is not calling in courts Samsung.
Anyway the fast TSMC acceleration in Fin Fet processes development is suspect. Sometimes stealing tech from other Companies halve the developing times. For example China is an artist in this pratice.
errorr - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
I am pretty sure Samsung cross-licensed a bunch of patents considering the GF 14nm is largely the one Samsung developed.lejeczek - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
ah.. you did not read at all or.. you did not read.I know, I knew some would shout that TSMC is Taiwanese and not Chinese both of which are not the same, to which my proposed implied reply was - yes, they are the same! (do not even bother to ask continental Chinamen for you will get yourself in trouble).
And it's that Chinese mentality which is root of the problem. Almost everybody lies but over there in China, everything suggests, it's a "national" issue.
Lastly, I hear you must be young, maybe very very young, you can this one simple thing - ask yourself (home work properly) how old semiconductor industry and about its origins (here you'll learn about places in Asia) and where was and what was China & Taiwan doing... lets say somewhere half way of the evolution of this industry.
My man that stuff does not go just 10 or 15 years back!
MandiEd - Saturday, August 31, 2019 - link
There is no 'Taiwan'. Only Republic of China and People's Republic of China. Both of them are Chinese and they share characters of Chinese. However, I don't see why this is relevant here.bigvlada - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Newsflash: US and Imperial Germany stole patents from British Empire. Japan and South Korea stole patents from the "West". China stole patents from all of the above. Every advanced industrial nation had a phase when they stole patents and know how from others.lejeczek - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Yes, true, but my man... If steal-copy-counterfeit art is something one can do for a living then China does it on an industrial scale!!I could tell you guys first-hand real stories but work I do is for public sector and I'm not sure I'm allowed to go into more details which I'd love to do.
FunBunny2 - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
"If steal-copy-counterfeit art is something one can do for a living then China does it on an industrial scale!!"don't get too high on your horse. if red-blooded Americans hadn't stolen virtually everything from the Brits in the 19th century, the USofA would just be another 3rd world country.
lejeczek - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
No high horse for me my man, me, I was born and since lived most of my live in 3rd world county.levizx - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
No high horse yet you think China is the only one mastered this, just because your "first hand" story. History tells a very different story. Not even a century ago USA steals "on an individual scale", not even half a century ago Japan steals "on an individual scale", merely a couple of decades ago Korea steals "on an individual scale". Just because you are too dumb to understand you don't know everything, doesn't mean none of those happened.lejeczek - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
@levizx - An angry man you are and after you called people names whatever you say can be ignored while being flushed down the toilet.Vitor - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
The tendency of knowledge is too spread. Should the western nations pay IP royalties for "stealing" powder from China centuries ago?Humans are a successfuk species because we are really good at learn from each other and adopting new methods and skills. No dumb law of granting a temporal monopoly over some concept can change that.
ghdsports app - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
TSMC Responds to Lawsuit by GlobalFoundries: Allegations Are Baseless. TSMC has responded to GlobalFoundries accusations of patents infringements. ... The company stresses that it spends billions of dollars on R&D and has been granted 37,000 patents worldwide.Sivar - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Defendant responds to lawsuit by saying the allegations are baseless. News at 11:00. :)mikato - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
ShockingCashmoney995 - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Oh GlobalFoundries, every single member of this site that has followed AMD knows that you were the true culprit in AMD's downfall....and magically when you left...things became amazing. Pathetic attempt of greed when history shows you ain't nothing but a Rambus.Techie2 - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
Hopefully in court it will all get resolved. GloFo isn't dumb enough to waste millions on litigation if they don't believe they can prove their claims in court. These cases can go back and forth in court for years. The bottom line is in the end the courts will rule based on evidence not emotion. If GloFo prevails then TSMC will be paying tens or hundreds of millions and they could be forced to terminate sales of certain products. If TSMC wins then GloFo is likely to have to cough up tens of millions so there is no point in filing frivolous lawsuits.Yongzhi - Saturday, August 31, 2019 - link
GF is too poor to pay for the daily payment. They had a good idea. To court TSMC patents infringements.nt300 - Sunday, September 1, 2019 - link
Something weird about this, it seems as though GlobF is in desperation or something.zamroni - Tuesday, September 10, 2019 - link
either tsmc or gf will lose in the court, but the lawyers will always win (get paid)RobJoy - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
If I was the owner of those patents, I too would want some compensation as they are broad enough to be self explanatory.