A legal dispute between Realtek and MediaTek has kicked off over Realtek claiming that MediaTek has gotten a third party company to sue Realtek over some unspecified patents involving technology used in smart TVs and set-top boxes. The third party involved goes under the name of IPValue Management Inc and appears to be what is generally known as a patent troll, i.e. a company that buys up patents and uses them to take legal actions against other companies, without actually producing anything related to the patents in question. Realtek claims that MediaTek is conspiring with IPValue to drive Realtek out of the market, leaving Mediatek in a close to monopoly situation in the market.

According to Reuters, Realtek told the publication that it filed the lawsuit against MediaTek to "protect free and fair competition in the industry" and "prevent further harm to the public." Neither MediaTek or IPValue have commented on the lawsuit to the publication. What makes this entire mess even more peculiar, is that MediaTek is said to have a licensing agreement in place with a subsidiary of IPValue called Future Link System LLC, which was signed in 2019. This agreement was brought up by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) in a separate lawsuit last year, with the ITC calling it alarming and the court calling it improper. After the ITC criticism last year, Future Link apparently settled with several other companies such as Amlogic, but not with Realtek, which is why the company is now taking things to court. Realtek claims that MediaTek is trying to force any allegedly infringing chips out of the market and trying to make Realtek look like an unreliable partner and supplier to its customers. As such, Realtek wants the court to end the alleged conspiracy and is also asking for damages. Time will tell if Realtek is successful or not, but it seems strange that a patent troll would agree to licence its patents to some parties, but not all, since the only reason for a patent troll to exist is to make money from its patents.

A federal grand jury indicted a state-owned enterprise of the People's Republic of China (PRC), a Taiwan company, and three individuals, charging them with crimes related to a conspiracy to steal, convey, and possess stolen trade secrets of an American semiconductor company for the benefit of a company controlled by the PRC government. All of the defendants are charged with a conspiracy to commit economic espionage, among other crimes. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers, Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division Brian A. Benczkowski, United States Attorney Alex G. Tse of the Northern District of California, and FBI Special Agent in Charge for the San Francisco Field Office John F. Bennett made the announcement.

In addition, the United States filed a civil lawsuit seeking to enjoin the further transfer of the stolen trade secrets and to enjoin certain defendants from exporting to the United States any products manufactured by UMC or Jinhua that were created using the trade secrets at issue. The indictment was filed on September 27, 2018, and unsealed today. The civil lawsuit was filed today.

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP and Pearson, Simon, Warshaw & Penny, LLP today announced that a federal court jury this morning found that Toshiba Corporation and its subsidiaries conspired with the world's other leading manufacturers of Thin Film Transistor-Liquid Crystal Displays ("TFT-LCDs") to raise and fix the prices of TFT-LCD panels and certain products. The jury awarded damages of $87 million. Federal antitrust law requires the trebling of these damages, resulting in a $261 million award against Toshiba.

Richard M. Heimann, co-lead counsel for plaintiffs, stated, "We are very pleased the jury found in favor of the plaintiffs and found that Toshiba violated the law, particularly in light of the government's decision not to criminally prosecute Toshiba for its misconduct. The case demonstrates once again the critical role our civil justice system plays in holding corporations, no matter how powerful or where they are based in the world, accountable for violating U.S. antitrust laws."

Earlier today, Apple unveiled a developer preview of its upcoming operating system for Macs, Macbooks, Mac Pro, and Mac Servers, codenamed "Mountain Lion". It could be observed that Apple mentioned the new OS as simply "OS X", without the "Mac" (as in Mac OS X). A quick run through the new developer preview by The Verge, revealed that the change took effect in the software as well, as all about boxes and information pages reflected it. The article also notes that Apple conspiracy theorists may draw a line between today's development and the 2007 decision to rename the company Apple Inc., from Apple Computer, indicating that Apple is prioritizing on its portable computing device product lines a lot more than its core product, the Mac.

That Dodgy Intel Ivy Bridge DX11 'demo' at CES 2012 (UPDATED)

Word has been flying round the internet about Intel's dodgy Ivy Bridge DX11 'demo'. Intel's Mooly Eden, VP, PC Client Group was attempting to demonstrate a racing game on a prototype laptop - 'ultrabook' - fitted with an upcoming 22 nm Ivy Bridge processor with a racing wheel attached and allegedly rendering DX11 graphics. However, as is very apparent at the start, it's actually a video, because the control panel for the free VLC video player pops up for a few seconds. Eden then 'drives' a car and after a few seconds puts up one hand and then the other, because as he says "they are driving it from backstage". However, there was no one driving the game "backstage", as it was just a video and Eden doesn't say anything about this at any point in the presentation.

This gives conspiracy theorists lots of ammunition, as perhaps the game was actually played on a high powered desktop PC with NVIDIA or AMD discrete graphics cards? What game was it? Eden doesn't say. "IB can't really do these graphics!" they cry and so on. Sure, man 'didn't' go to the moon, either... However, we believe that while yes, there was a bit of deception going on, it was nothing more than a white(ish) lie. Why? Because Ivy Bridge comes out in April and people aren't going to forget this demo. They will immediately put IBs DX11 graphics to the test with similar games and if it doesn't deliver, Intel will have a lot of egg on its face. Here's what Intel had to say about this demo in an official statement: