Set micro-grid launch micro-channel IC WeChat public number: 'Daily IC', real-time release of major news, every day IC, every day set of micro-network, micro-into a!
1. Qualcomm re-appeals Apple infringement, requiring the United States ban iPhone X;
Qualcomm filed a new lawsuit against Apple on Wednesday, accusing the iPhone iPhone X, iPhone 8 and the iPhone, just as Apple accused Qualcomm's Snapdragon processor of infringing on at least eight patents, according to technology blog AppleInsider, Beijing Nov. 30, 7 Infringement of its 5 patents.
Qualcomm filed suit in the District Court for the Southern District of California, which claims five patents that Apple infringes on the company's RF transceiver, mobile processor capabilities, device power management, and image enhancement based on depth of field data.
The first case of this case involving U.S. Patent No. 9,154,356, entitled "Low Noise Amplifier for Carrier Polymerization," is the same as the second patent, entitled "RF Front End Integration with Multiple LNA Modules" , The latter patent number is No. 9,473,336 Both patents discuss ways to enable communication with cellular operators.
Qualcomm this lawsuit covers a variety of Apple devices, including last year's iPhone 7 series phones and this year's newly released iPhone 8, iPhone X. Specifically, the iPhone 7 RF technology used violated Qualcomm's amplification and polymerization of intellectual property rights, The iPhone 8/8 Plus and the iPhone X infringed Qualcomm's amplifier design patent, and Apple's current handset infringes on the communication method described in the first patent.
Qualcomm litigation documents
In addition, Qualcomm alleged that the A10 SoC chipset used in the iPhone 7/7 Plus infringes its U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674, a multi-voltage power-on / power-down detector that describes the power-on and power- In reducing power consumption methods, such as Apple A10 core and control network.
Qualcomm U.S. Patent No. 9,552,633 also states that the 'Dynamic Word Line Driver and Decoder for Memory Arrays' patent is also related to A10, especially static random access memory.
Finally, Qualcomm accused Apple of using the dual-camera iPhone models, including the iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X, using the U.S. Patent No. 9,552,633 'Stereoscopic Enhancement of Depth-Perceived Enhancement. "Qualcomm specifically pointed out that The patent covers image enhancement techniques based on depth map data captured by the camera offset module.
Apple released 'Portrait Mode' when it released Phone 7 Plus and added Portrait Lighting function to its iPhone 8 and iPhone X. Taking advantage of the different spatial orientation of the images taken by the iPhone's two camera modules , Create a depth map.
Qualcomm asked the court to issue a ban on Apple's infringing devices and seek indemnities and related fees for unspecified amounts.
The suit is the latest in a litigation battle between Qualcomm and Apple around the world, and in January, Apple accused Qualcomm of deducting nearly $ 1 billion in royalties for refunds, just Wednesday morning when Apple filed a counterclaim against Qualcomm alleging that Snapdragon processors infringe at least 8 of its battery life patents.
Qualcomm also launched a counterattack, filed a series of lawsuits against Apple that Apple's legal action is only a policy to obtain favorable terms of the license fee.
2. Patent wars upgrade Apple denounced Qualcomm as 'patent rogue';
SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 30 (Beijing time) In a news release on the afternoon of November 30, Apple and its vendor Qualcomm were born again and again. The iPhone maker accused the mobile chip designer of behaving like a "patent rogue."
The latest lawsuits and sharp rhetoric spurred Wall Street fears that as the relationship between the two deteriorated, Apple may abandon Qualcomm's modem chip when it makes the next generation of iPhone smartphones.
Lawsuits between the two companies have been on the rise since the beginning of 2017. Apple accused Qualcomm of charging too much for intellectual property and was anti-competitive, while chipmakers said Apple could not have invented the iPhone without its own innovations In July, Qualcomm began accusing Apple of patent infringement and sought to start a ban on imports of Apple 's smartphones in several key markets.
Earlier this Wednesday, Apple responded to a July lawsuit alleging Qualcomm infringed the company's battery management patents, saying that Qualcomm will put Apple's high-efficiency power technology into the flagship Snapdragon 800 and 820 processors , So that Android smartphones, including Samsung Galaxy S7, greatly enhanced power.
The iPhone maker accused Qualcomm of acting like a patent rogue, hoarding intellectual property without making any real product and charging litigation fees alone, marking a freeze in the relationship between the two companies.
In a Wednesday legal document, Apple wrote: 'This case tells the story of the two companies, on the one hand, we Apple created the product category of modern smartphones that give the iPhone the cutting edge design, ease of connectivity and Advanced battery life, and a host of interactive applications that make the phone smarter, while on the other hand, while Qualcomm pioneered the basic technology of making phone calls over the phone, those technologies are outdated. "
Apple did not specify the required amount of patent infringement claims.In January of this year, Qualcomm and its largest customer, Apple Inc., for the first time, the legal dispute between the two companies so that Qualcomm's share price fell sharply.
Due to the poor performance of the stock, Qualcomm competitor chip maker Broadcom companies to take advantage of, to be 130 billion acquisition of Qualcomm, but was Qualcomm board of directors to bid too low on the grounds to be rejected Broadcom is expected in the next few weeks Turn malicious acquisition, and prepared to launch war on the proxy. (Yang Ge)
3. Really wonderful! Look at the patent and patent between Apple and Apple how to staged each other?
According to foreign media reports, Apple filed a counterclaim against Qualcomm on Wednesday, accusing Qualcomm's Snapdragon mobile phone chips infringed Apple's eight patents.While it is noteworthy that, then, Qualcomm also on Wednesday for Apple's latest iPhone In the five technology proposed patent litigation.
In fact, the patent lawsuit between Qualcomm and Apple has not stopped since January of this year, and in July, Qualcomm accused Apple of violating several patents related to helping mobile phones get longer battery life, after which Apple denied Infringed Qualcomm's battery life patent and claimed Qualcomm's patent is invalid.
However, Apple Wednesday filed a filing with the United States District Court in San Diego to amend its response to Qualcomm's allegations that Apple claims it owns at least eight patents for battery life, which Qualcomm infringes on.
It is reported that Apple's patent includes ensuring that each part of the handset processor to extract only the minimum required power, when not needed to turn off some parts of the processor, and let the sleep and wake function to better work.
Apple said in a filing that Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 and 820 processors violated the patents, and Apple wrote in the indictment: "In the case before Qualcomm began seeking to own the patents, Apple started a few years ago Seeking these patents. "Meanwhile, Apple filed a claim to Qualcomm in a counterclaim.
Qualcomm filed a lawsuit shortly after Apple sued Qualcomm and filed a patent lawsuit against the technology in Apple's latest iPhone.
Qualcomm filed a lawsuit in Southern California District Court alleging that Apple had infringed five of the company's patents, including radio frequency transceivers, mobile CPU power efficiency, device power management, and image enhancement based on depth of field data, etc. In the case, Qualcomm Mentioned a variety of Apple products, including iPhone 7, iPhone 8 and iPhone X.
Two of these patents are respectively the 'carrier aggregation low noise amplifier' of U.S. Patent No. 9154356 and the 'low noise amplifier module integrated with the radio frequency front end' of U.S. Patent No. 9473336. These two patents describe the relationship between a mobile terminal and a carrier device Method of communication.
In addition, Qualcomm believes that the A10 processor in the Apple iPhone 7 series uses the patented U.S. Patent No. 8063674. This patent describes ways to reduce power consumption in power switch control networks, such as the Apple A10 processor core and control network.
The A10 processor is also charged with a patent infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,693,002. This patent relates to SRAM memory control logic.
For dual-camera iPhone camera technology, Qualcomm said that Apple uses the patent US Patent No. 9552633. This patent describes how to optimize the image based on the depth of field information in the photo.
Qualcomm appeals to court to hear this and seek injunctions against those devices, as well as indemnified damages and related costs.
4. The European Commission released the "EU Methodological Communication on the Establishment of Essential Patent Requirements";
Set the micro-mesh news, in order to ensure that under the SEP framework to achieve the interests of the balance, smooth progress and predictability, the European Commission will establish a series of principles.In response to this, the European Commission recently also announced "on the development of standard EU patents required Communication "(hereinafter referred to as" EU Method ").
This "EU Method" consists of the preface, expanding the transparency of patent disclosure, the general principle of the FRAND licensing clause of the SEP, the predictable execution environment of SEP, the open source and standards, the conclusion of these six components.In addition, the "EU Method "There is no legal coercion, for reference purposes only.
In the meantime, the European Commission said that the "EU methodology" takes into account the organizational characteristics and efficiency factors of the industry, presents a comprehensive methodology and key principles for SEP licensing and will continue to oversee the SEP licensing market, with a special focus on IoT technologies.
The following is a summary of the "EU Method":
I. Introduction
In order to ensure a balance of interests, smooth progress and predictability within the framework of the SEP, the European Commission will establish a series of principles that will need to meet two major objectives: on the one hand, providing patentees with adequate and fair returns to motivate them The inclusion of state-of-the-art technologies in the standards and their promotion of technological development will be based on the fair access of patent users and the smooth and widespread dissemination of standardized technologies.
This "EU Method" has no legal force and is for reference only.
Second, to expand the transparency of patent disclosure
Information on the existence, scope and relevance of patents is important for patent licensing negotiations, but currently SEP users have access to only the information declared by the Patent Development Organizations ("SDOs") that lack transparency and that to improve SEP The transparency of information, the European Commission believes that the need to take the following measures:
(A) to improve the quality and accessibility of information in the SDO database
First, users should have easy access to data through an experience-friendly interface. Second, duplication and other obvious errors should be reduced. Finally, the patent office database should be connected.
(B) to develop a communication tool to facilitate the communication
During licensing negotiations, patent holders need to prove to SEP users the necessity of the patent portfolio for the standard and the specific circumstances under which the above patent is infringed, so it is necessary to invest this.
1. The latest and more accurate declaration
During the standard-setting process, the technical solutions may change, and the initial patent application may no longer meet the requirements, but generally will not be reviewed later. Therefore, after the standard formulation, the patentee should examine the relevance of the application.
2. Necessity review
A review of the need for patents requires an independent third party with technical competence and market acceptance, while also balancing costs.
3. Implementation methods
The patent office may be a superior option for synergies and cost savings in the review of necessity, and the European Commission will support feasibility studies in this area and may identify an independent European agency to review the necessity of SEP.
Third, the general principles of SEP's FRAND licensing terms
(A) the principle of permission
There is no uniform standard for the definition of FRAND, and the definitions of 'fairness' and 'fairness' vary with industry and times, but efficiency, the reasonable expectation of licensing fees by both parties, the widespread use of standards by users, etc. Factors. The European Commission encourages market participants to engage in intra-industry discussions and establish a unified licensing practice based on the principles in this chapter.
The European Commission considers the following principles of valuation of intellectual property should be considered:
1. The license clause should clearly indicate the economic value of the patented technology.
2. Valuation based on FRAND principles should take into account the added value of patents to patented technology, regardless of the market success of products that are not related to patented technology.
3. In valuing on the FRAND principle, consideration should be given to continuing incentives for patent holders to encourage them to include the best technology in the standard, where feasible.
4. In determining the value of FRAND, in order to avoid patenting stacks, the license fee for one SEP can not be considered separately but instead should be taken into account for a reasonable overall rate for that standard.
(II) Efficiency and non-discrimination
The principle of non-discrimination in the FRAND principle means that the patentee can not discriminate against users who are in a "similar situation." Because FRAND does not have a uniform standard, the non-discriminatory approach to non-discrimination varies by industry and business model.
Judicial consultation:
1. Consider the efficiency factor.
2. Minimize the transaction costs of license negotiation.
3. In the context of a wide range of cross-licensing, the efficiency of the practice should be considered.
4. For worldwide distribution of products, worldwide licensing of SEPs may meet efficiency requirements.
(Iii) promote the use of SEP-licensed patent pools and licensing platforms
The European Commission encourages SDO and SEP holders to develop effective ways of promoting patent licenses for a large number of users in the IoT environment through patent pools or other licensing platforms while ensuring full transparency and predictability.
(D) use and deepen SEP expertise
The European Commission will oversee licensing practices and will pay special attention to the Internet of Things industry and will set up a panel of experts to deepen its experience in industry licensing practice, yield valuation and FRAND certification.
Fourth, on the SEP's predictable execution environment
The intersection of this chapter and controversy is the feasibility of injunctive relief. It is necessary to safeguard the patentee against patent infringement and to solve the problem of patent hijacking.
(1) The feasibility of injunctive relief in Huawei v ZTE case
The European Commission considers the following points relevant to the domestic case law that apply to Huawei ZTE case as additional guidance to market participants:
1. A large number of courts have emphasized that the potential SEP licensees need to obtain sufficiently detailed and relevant information to determine the relevance of the SEP portfolio and whether it meets the FRAND principles.The following matters need to be explained in detail by the European Commission in its analysis of FRAND Offers and Oppositions : Patents Necessity of standards, products allegedly infringed by SEP users, royalty calculations, and non-discriminatory elements of the FRAND Principles.
2. The Opposition should be realistic and specific and should not be limited to objections to SEP Holders' Offers and to cite rates set by third parties and should include the use of standard information in certain products.
3. The anti-treaty proposed timeliness is not a fixed standard, according to the specific case to judge.
(B) consider the proportionality
The ban could have a wide-ranging impact on commercial, consumer and public interest, and proportionality should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
(C) litigation based on patent portfolio
The SEP holder may provide several patents, including non-SEPs, but may not require the licensee to accept these additional patents in order to be licensed. In order to comply with the FRAND principle, the anti-treaty should be relevant to all SEPs required for a license and not based solely on A separate patent.
(D) Multivariate dispute resolution mechanism
The EU member states that arbitration and conciliation will be more convenient and cost-saving, and this kind of multiple dispute resolution will be encouraged.
(E) patent claims entities and SEP
The EU Commission will continue to monitor as more and more patents claim that entities are involved in the SEP licensing market and have a negative impact on the EU domestic market.
(Vi) to raise awareness
Market participants, particularly SDO and SEP holders, need to take the initiative to raise awareness about the FRAND licensing process and its impact, especially for small and medium-sized businesses.
Fifth, open source and standards
The European Commission, together with market participants, open-source groups and SDOs, will promote effective interaction of open source and standardization through research and analysis.
Sixth, the conclusion
The European Commission, considering the organizational characteristics and efficiency factors of the industry, presents a comprehensive approach and key principles for SEP licensing and will continue to oversee the SEP licensing market with a special focus on IoT technologies.
5.OECD: The number of global AI patents from 2010 to 2015 grew by an average of 6% annually;
The latest OECD Science and Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2017 published by the World Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development showed that with the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) related technologies, the global AI related The number of patents has risen from 13,617 in 2010 to 18,429 in 2015, an average annual growth of 6%, which is double the average annual growth rate of patents in other fields. Japan, South Korea, the United States, the EU 28, the mainland and Taiwan has the top six regions with the most AI-related patents, accounting for 93.8% of all AI patents in the above regions, although the share of AI patents held by Japan, the United States and the EU-28 is 35.8% of that in 2000-2005 %, 23.2% and 19.1% respectively, down 27.9%, 17.2% and 11.9% respectively from 2010 to 2015. Korea, Mainland China and Taiwan increased from 10.5%, 1.7% and 3.6% to 17.5% and 10.4% to 8.9%. OECD said breakthroughs in AI technology, such as machine learning, coupled with emerging technologies such as Big Data and cloud computing, have deepened the potential impact of AI, taking the patent for medical diagnosis as an example. Approximately 30% of medical diagnostic technology patents and AI technologies are available in 2015 In addition, scientific publications related to machine learning also showed significant growth, with the United States now ranking the highest in the world in terms of the number of publications published in this field, followed by the mainland, while India and the United Kingdom ranked third and fourth respectively. , The quality and quantity of scientific research in mainland China have been growing rapidly in the past 15 years, not only in number two in the world but also in 14.01% of local publications in 2016, second only to 25.53% in the United States 28 countries accounted for 32.25%) .In 2005, the number of mainland publications cited still accounted for only 3.86%; the same year, the United States accounted for 38.19% of the total number of publications. DIGITIMES
6. Apple won the TrueDepth camera patent, can be used to support 3D interface gestures
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office officially launched today a series of 69 new patents on Apple Inc. In this particular report, we introduced the Apple-authorized 3D interface invention that controls the behavior of Macs through interaction with user gestures The team behind this is Apple's patented Israeli PrimeSense, which is also the team behind Apple's TrueDepth cameras and point-and-shoot projectors, while Johny Srouji, Apple's senior vice president of hardware technology, This is confirmed by media interviews, so will Face ID and the advanced 3D user interface for gesture control appear in future iMacs and beyond?
Patents Patents: 3D UI session control with depth sensors
The latest Apple patents cover inventions related to computerized system user interfaces, and more particularly to three-dimensional sensing based user interfaces.
In particular, the invention encompasses a method comprising receiving, by a computer executing a non-contact three-dimensional (3D) user interface, a plurality of 3D coordinates representing gestures within the field of view of a sensing device coupled into a computer .
The three-dimensional (3D) user interface includes a gesture that involves ascending movement along a vertical axis in space, and the non-contact 3D user interface transitions from a locked state to an unlocked state upon detecting the completion of the gesture.
Apple Figure 6A, 6B, 6C, and 6D illustrate the response of a non-contact 3D user interface to the vertical movement of a user's hand.
3D interface and gesture
The Apple patent was originally filed at Q and is now published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Apple Inc. awarded Micha Galor, Jonathan Pokrass and Amir Hoffnung as inventors of the granted patent 9,829,988, originally filed in December 2016. Qing Pavilion