• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

Swiftech Withdraws H220 CPU Liquid Cooling Kit from US Market

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#51
Here's where we're going to have to differentiate opinions on the matter.

Asetek has filed a patent that is basically applicable to any closed loop heat transfer system. You're looking at a patent from a computer hardware focused company, and only seeing that one application.

In reality, houses can use a system of tubes beneath the flooring for heating and cooling. A heat transfer segment, with an integrated pump, can push the heated or cooled liquid out and into the tubes. The tubes then transfer a portion of their heat into the surroundings. These systems have been around in high-end houses and building for decades.

Now, tell me that Asetek has a case. A patentable system must demonstrate that it is a unique solution, and not a trivial combination of existing components.

So, Swiftech is doing the only sensible thing. They are forgoing the huge money pit that this litigation will cost. They are pulling the product that they think might be the source of this litigation, and they are changing their aims.


I cannot call this trolling, because it isn't. I'm calling this a crappy patent, that should never have been approved by the US patent system. Because it would take a law suit to challenge this, Swiftech is backing down. They cannot afford the litigation, but hopefully someone else will.

As far as not suing for other products, just wait. Rarely do companies stop when something is proven viable. If one lawsuit threat stops the AIO competitors, another could well kill the custom loop makers. Who's to say that Asetek won't be designing these systems in the near future? I prefer to allow action to speak, and Asetek's licensing refusal speaks volumes about their intents.



Edit:
Let's clarify one more thing. If you were to spend 20 minutes, and remove all references to CPU and computer what do you have? A patent for a generic closed loop heat transfer system, where the pump happens to be integrated with one of the heat transfer surfaces. I could make the same claims about any car radiator, home heating/cooling system, and the environmental water heating systems used in houses (black sacks on the roof absorb solar energy, heat water, then the heated water is used in the house).

This indicates that the patent was improperly awarded, and any judge presented with it should invalidate it for not meeting basic requirements. If the US patent office was competent and well staffed this crap never would have been given out in the first place.
You went and typed all that out and it was a complete waste. You're still trying to argue based on the assumption they are suing over AOI cooling systems, they aren't. They are suing about the individual, unigue, parts that they developed and patented. I swear I read somewhere that it was the pump/block combo, but BTA said it was the rotating fitting. Either way, they aren't suing simply because they threw a bunch of pre-existing parts together into a system and patented the system. Parts of the system didn't exist before they developed them, that is why they have a valid claim, and these unique parts in the patent are what they are trying to prevent other companies from using.

And if you spend 20 minutes removing CPU and computer, you still have a patent on the pump/block combo and 180° rotating fittings, both of which as far as anyone can tell didn't exists before Asetek developed them. Both of these things are innovative ideas that seem to be unique, no patent judge would invalidate the patent on these.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
3,626 (1.09/day)
Likes
938
Location
Vietnam
System Name Gaming System / Laptop / HTPC
Processor i5 8600K @4.6Ghz / i5 540m / i7 970
Motherboard Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming / Acer / Shuttle sx58j3
Cooling CM Seidon 120 XL / Laptop Cooling / SE-903
Memory T Group Nighthawk (3000 MHz)/ 4GB DDR3 / 12gb DDR3
Video Card(s) Colorful 1080Ti / G210m / 7870XT
Storage 750G MX300 + 3TB HDDs / 250G Ultra II /250G 850 EVO
Display(s) Dell U2515H + Asus VX239H/ 15.6" Laptop Screen / 720p 42" Plasma TV
Case Cooler master HAF 922 / Laptop Case / Corsair Air 240
Audio Device(s) On Board Realtek
Power Supply Andyson N700 Titanium / Laptop Power / ACBell 700 W
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard CM Quickfire XT (Cherry MX Reds)
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Firestrike = xxxxx Timespy = 9097 Heaven = xxxx
#52
The patent in question covers that L-shaped fitting on the block/pump, which can turn around 180° while remaining watertight.
"The two patents are intrinsically related: the latter was filed back in 2010, while the former revised the design of the system to better reflect the state of the art when it was filed in 2011. Both include reference to the use of a liquid-cooling system connected to a pump and radiator, designed to be fully integrated into a single maintenance-free design - and if you think that sounds a little broad, you might be right given that the patents encompass 'different embodiments of the heat exchanging system as well as means for establishing and controlling a flow of cooling liquid.'"

and

"The patent in question, publication number US 2012/0061058 (PDF warning), describes 'a cooling system for a computer system [...] comprising a reservoir having an amount of cooling liquid, said cooling liquid intended for accumulating and transferring the thermal energy dissipated from the processing unit to the cooling liquid. The cooling system has a heat exchange interface for providing thermal contact between the processing unit and the cooling liquid for dissipating heat from the processing unit to the cooling liquid.'"

- http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/03/11/asetek-sues-cm/1
- http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/08/31/astek-sues-coolit/1


I haven't read anything about the L-Shaped fitting. But, I have yet to find a well-written (neutral) article on the matter.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,442 (1.00/day)
Likes
1,866
#53
The patent in question covers that L-shaped fitting on the block/pump, which can turn around 180° while remaining watertight.
What?

Neither patent 362 or 764 make mention of that component. The diagrams provided in the patent filing don't even include provisions for that fitting.

Are you seeing something that I am missing? If so, please point it out so I can understand where you're coming from.


You went and typed all that out and it was a complete waste. You're still trying to argue based on the assumption they are suing over AOI cooling systems, they aren't. They are suing about the individual, unigue, parts that they developed and patented. I swear I read somewhere that it was the pump/block combo, but BTA said it was the rotating fitting. Either way, they aren't suing simply because they threw a bunch of pre-existing parts together into a system and patented the system. Parts of the system didn't exist before they developed them, that is why they have a valid claim, and these unique parts in the patent are what they are trying to prevent other companies from using.

And if you spend 20 minutes removing CPU and computer, you still have a patent on the pump/block combo and 180° rotating fittings, both of which as far as anyone can tell didn't exists before Asetek developed them. Both of these things are innovative ideas that seem to be unique, no patent judge would invalidate the patent on these.
Don't go by what you read, do the reading. Here is the article the other thread linked to, from Swiftech: http://www.swiftech.com/pr-7-19-13-h220-removedfromus.aspx

Their two filings don't make mention of a fitting. What they are (and they're really one filing later updated to reflect the changing reality) is an attempt to make a pump, radiator, block system into a two component system. This is clear as day if you look at the pictures.

My argument is that this is not a novel approach or idea. It's a logical progression. They took a pump, relocated it in the cooling loop, and tried to patent it. The structure of the pump could likely be patented, assuming that the pump worked in some novel way. That is not well defined in the patent.

I am all for patents protecting unique ideas. Asetek likely spent a good chunk of money in designing the system, which was an engineering challenge. What it was not is a novel idea. The purpose of a patent, hopefully we both agree on this, is to protect novel ideas not engineering investments.


As far as the 180 degree bracket, that should be patentable. It is a unique design, that is not a trivial design change. Assuming that is buried in the patent somewhere deep, Asetek has a winner. The problem is that unique idea should have a patent, not the heat change system that is incorported around it.

Neither cited patent from Swiftech covers the bracket, so I don't know how that conclusion has been reached. If there is something other than the press release cited, please do provide it. I'd be happy to be wrong if why I am wrong could be cited, rather than conjectured at.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
3,626 (1.09/day)
Likes
938
Location
Vietnam
System Name Gaming System / Laptop / HTPC
Processor i5 8600K @4.6Ghz / i5 540m / i7 970
Motherboard Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming / Acer / Shuttle sx58j3
Cooling CM Seidon 120 XL / Laptop Cooling / SE-903
Memory T Group Nighthawk (3000 MHz)/ 4GB DDR3 / 12gb DDR3
Video Card(s) Colorful 1080Ti / G210m / 7870XT
Storage 750G MX300 + 3TB HDDs / 250G Ultra II /250G 850 EVO
Display(s) Dell U2515H + Asus VX239H/ 15.6" Laptop Screen / 720p 42" Plasma TV
Case Cooler master HAF 922 / Laptop Case / Corsair Air 240
Audio Device(s) On Board Realtek
Power Supply Andyson N700 Titanium / Laptop Power / ACBell 700 W
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard CM Quickfire XT (Cherry MX Reds)
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Firestrike = xxxxx Timespy = 9097 Heaven = xxxx
#54
The pump block combo's original drawing uses Socket 478 mounting, its been in there for a while...

Edit: This is the original patent filed in 2004. It clearly has the pump/block combo in it.

http://www.google.com/patents/EP1923771A1
I just read through this.

It appears to be the original patent + the 2008 update.

Does the unedited 2004 patent contain a water block + pump combination. If not, then it should not even have been considered for a patent due to prior art.
 
Last edited:

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#55
Don't go by what you read, do the reading. Here is the article the other thread linked to, from Swiftech: http://www.swiftech.com/pr-7-19-13-h220-removedfromus.aspx

Their two filings don't make mention of a fitting. What they are (and they're really one filing later updated to reflect the changing reality) is an attempt to make a pump, radiator, block system into a two component system. This is clear as day if you look at the pictures.

My argument is that this is not a novel approach or idea. It's a logical progression. They took a pump, relocated it in the cooling loop, and tried to patent it. The structure of the pump could likely be patented, assuming that the pump worked in some novel way. That is not well defined in the patent.

I am all for patents protecting unique ideas. Asetek likely spent a good chunk of money in designing the system, which was an engineering challenge. What it was not is a novel idea. The purpose of a patent, hopefully we both agree on this, is to protect novel ideas not engineering investments.


As far as the 180 degree bracket, that should be patentable. It is a unique design, that is not a trivial design change. Assuming that is buried in the patent somewhere deep, Asetek has a winner. The problem is that unique idea should have a patent, not the heat change system that is incorported around it.

Neither cited patent from Swiftech covers the bracket, so I don't know how that conclusion has been reached. If there is something other than the press release cited, please do provide it. I'd be happy to be wrong if why I am wrong could be cited, rather than conjectured at.
You can't use the logic that someone would have thought to do it eventually to invalidate a patent. That is true of most patents. The fact is no one had thought of combining the pump and block before Asetek, it was a unique idea, and patenting it is a valid thing to do.

Tons of patents are just someone taking something and improving it in a new way that no one else thought of, that is the definition of innovation.

I just read through this.

It appears to be the original patent + the 2008 update.

Does the unedited 2004 patent contain a water block + pump combination. If not, then it should not even have been considered for a patent due to it being existing technology.
You can read the original on the USPTO website here. I can't get the image to work, but the descriptions of the figures still match, so it appears that yes the pump/block combo was in the original 2004 filing.

Again, the original art shows 478 mounting hardware, that should give you an idea of how old these drawing are, 775 replaced 478 in 2004 and 478 was pretty much off the market by 2005.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
3,626 (1.09/day)
Likes
938
Location
Vietnam
System Name Gaming System / Laptop / HTPC
Processor i5 8600K @4.6Ghz / i5 540m / i7 970
Motherboard Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming / Acer / Shuttle sx58j3
Cooling CM Seidon 120 XL / Laptop Cooling / SE-903
Memory T Group Nighthawk (3000 MHz)/ 4GB DDR3 / 12gb DDR3
Video Card(s) Colorful 1080Ti / G210m / 7870XT
Storage 750G MX300 + 3TB HDDs / 250G Ultra II /250G 850 EVO
Display(s) Dell U2515H + Asus VX239H/ 15.6" Laptop Screen / 720p 42" Plasma TV
Case Cooler master HAF 922 / Laptop Case / Corsair Air 240
Audio Device(s) On Board Realtek
Power Supply Andyson N700 Titanium / Laptop Power / ACBell 700 W
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard CM Quickfire XT (Cherry MX Reds)
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Firestrike = xxxxx Timespy = 9097 Heaven = xxxx
#56
As the patent also mentions a separate res, block, pump and radiator system, I am dubious as to the scrutiny the patent was given. It seems like a patent for a 'pre-assembled' water cooling solution.

We'll see what a judge says at the outcome though. It's a lot of text to read for a Sunday afternoon so I will reserve judgement until a judge rules on it or I see a proper write up on the issue.

Edit - I got the image from the original it appears it was issued in 2005.

 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
2,553 (0.84/day)
Likes
1,013
Location
United States
System Name Aluminum Mallard
Processor Intel i7 940
Motherboard ASUS Rampage III: Gene
Cooling Noctua C-12P
Memory 6GB Corsair Dominator DDR3
Video Card(s) ASUS HD5870
Storage OCZ Vertex 2 60GB SSD, 2 x Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 in RAID0
Display(s) HP w2338h
Case Corsair 700D
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply Corsair TX850
Software Win7 Ult 64 bit
Benchmark Scores 31 FPS in Dalaran.
#57
Only read the first page here, so here I go.

Asetek is clearly in the right in demanding licensing fees for their intellectual property. Asetek clearly doesn't meet the requirement of being a patent troll. They actually manufacture AIO units. They invented the pump/block, they patented it at the very least, so it's their property.

Swiftech, etc. should immediately begin the process of license fee negotiations. If Asetek won't license it, then they are dicks, lol.
 

Mindweaver

Moderato®™
Staff member
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
6,583 (2.08/day)
Likes
3,915
Location
Charleston, SC
System Name Sechs / EyeSeven
Processor i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz / i7 2600k @ 4.0Ghz
Motherboard X99S GAMING 7 / ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3
Cooling CORSAIR Hydro Series H100i Extreme / Stock cooler... H50 leaked!..
Memory G.Skill DDR4 2800 16GB 4x4GB / G.Skill DDR3 1600 8gb 2x4GB
Video Card(s) PNY Quadro K2000 / MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4Gb
Storage Samsung 850 PRO 256GB SSD /Intel 240gb, corsair 120gb SSD, 3x 1 tb s storage
Display(s) 2x Acer G276HL 27" 1080p / 3x Acer 22" Nvidia surround
Case Phanteks “Enthoo Pro series”/ Cooler Master Storm Scout
Audio Device(s) Azalia Realtek ALC1150 / SB X-Fi Gamer
Power Supply Corsair CXM CX600M / Corsair 600w
Mouse Razer DeathAdder Chroma / Razer DeathAdder
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow Ultimate /
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 / Windows 10 Pro x64
#58
Wow.. Just when I was going to pull the trigger on one of these units..
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,442 (1.00/day)
Likes
1,866
#59
You can't use the logic that someone would have thought to do it eventually to invalidate a patent. That is true of most patents. The fact is no one had thought of combining the pump and block before Asetek, it was a unique idea, and patenting it is a valid thing to do.

Tons of patents are just someone taking something and improving it in a new way that no one else thought of, that is the definition of innovation.
Answer me this question, then either agree to the absurdity or continue with an argument that is untenable.

Tomorrow I am going to file a patent. This patent will be based off of an initially three component system; a pump, a radiator, and a heat transfer surface. Instead of three unique components, I will combine all three into one. It will have the heat transfer surface on the bottom, the pump integrated above that, a flow through a finned radiator, then a series of pipes taking the cooled fluid back down into the heat transfer surface.

The unit itself will look very similar to a conventional large air cooler, with an extra large base.

I am taking three things that were once separate, and combining them into a single device. By your logic, this is patentable. On top of the patent issued to me, I can sue pretty much everyone. I will argue that the competitive options may use a large loop, but selling all three things together violates my patent.


Please, argue that what I am saying is wrong. Argue that this is somehow a derivative work, and it would never get a patent. My argument is that Asetek already has a similar patent. That is the problem I've got. They got a patent for something that should never have been issued a patent. The connectors can reasonably be patented. The pumps, depending upon operational methodology, can be patented. Bolting two existing components together is not novel or unique, and thus should not have been patentable.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#60
As the patent also mentions a separate res, block, pump and radiator system, I am dubious as to the scrutiny the patent was given. It seems like a patent for a 'pre-assembled' water cooling solution.

We'll see what a judge says at the outcome though. It's a lot of text to read for a Sunday afternoon so I will reserve judgement until a judge rules on it or I see a proper write up on the issue.

Edit - I got the image from the original it appears it was issued in 2005.

http://img.techpowerup.org/130721/Untitled.png
Patents can cover a lot of technology, they do not have to focus on one item. You do not have to patent every individual part. If you patent a system that contains unique parts, then the unique parts are patented as well.

Answer me this question, then either agree to the absurdity or continue with an argument that is untenable.

Tomorrow I am going to file a patent. This patent will be based off of an initially three component system; a pump, a radiator, and a heat transfer surface. Instead of three unique components, I will combine all three into one. It will have the heat transfer surface on the bottom, the pump integrated above that, a flow through a finned radiator, then a series of pipes taking the cooled fluid back down into the heat transfer surface.

The unit itself will look very similar to a conventional large air cooler, with an extra large base.

I am taking three things that were once separate, and combining them into a single device. By your logic, this is patentable. On top of the patent issued to me, I can sue pretty much everyone. I will argue that the competitive options may use a large loop, but selling all three things together violates my patent.


Please, argue that what I am saying is wrong. Argue that this is somehow a derivative work, and it would never get a patent. My argument is that Asetek already has a similar patent. That is the problem I've got. They got a patent for something that should never have been issued a patent. The connectors can reasonably be patented. The pumps, depending upon operational methodology, can be patented. Bolting two existing components together is not novel or unique, and thus should not have been patentable.
Sure, its patentable, but you couldn't sue everyone. They already have prior art. Your concept would improve upon it, compacting the design, and would likely require some pretty nifty engineering to make into on unit that can hang off a CPU socket. You would get the patent, and that engineering that you did would be protected, but you couldn't sue everyone that makes AIO coolers.

You want a perfect example of how the patent system allows people to take something an innovate it just look at barbed wire. There are literally thousands of patents for barbed wire were someone took the original design and just tweaked it. Moved the barbs closer, changed the barb design, changed the material it is made from. Barbed wire was original made of wire, someone decided to make it out of stamped razor thin metal and patented that. Then someone came along and figured out if you run a reinforcing wire down the middle of the stamped metal it worked better, he combined the two previous concept into one and patented that. It was still a patent for barbed wire, but the idea of combining the wire and stamped metal was something no one else had thought to do, and hence was patentable. However, he couldn't go back and sue everyone else that was making barbed wire out of just wire or just stamped metal.

That is why Asetek isn't suing everyone selling closed water loops. If the pump is separate or contained in the res or radiator, they aren't suing them, because they know they really can't.

Also, you'd think combing different parts of a system would be logical and easy to do. But, ironically, Swiftech tried combining the pump with the radiator, they even patented it so no one else could do it. It doesn't work nearly as well as combining the pump with the waterblock. Thee reason is that a lot of people put the radiator at the top of the case, the highest point in the case. So when the fluid gets a little low the pump begins sucking air in this situation. However, putting the pump on the waterblock greatly reduces the likelihood of the pump sucking air.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,442 (1.00/day)
Likes
1,866
#61
This argument is getting us nowhere. I concede that you have some reasonable points, but the truth is both of our ideas mean little. Going to court is the only way this is going to be solved, and lawyers don't run on logic.


With that, I concede. Continued point and counterpoint doesn't serve either of us.
 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
26,568 (6.38/day)
Likes
7,468
Location
Houston
System Name Team Blue
Processor 5960X@4.8 1.42v
Motherboard Asus X99M-WS
Cooling EK Supremecy EVO, MCR220-Stack+MCR220+MCR320, D5-PWM+EK X-RES 140
Memory 4x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL16
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's+ EVGA reference 1080Ti soon to be under water
Storage Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron
Keyboard Thermaltake Poseidon ZX
Software W10P
Benchmark Scores Zoom zoom mofo
#62
Answer me this question, then either agree to the absurdity or continue with an argument that is untenable.

Tomorrow I am going to file a patent. This patent will be based off of an initially three component system; a pump, a radiator, and a heat transfer surface. Instead of three unique components, I will combine all three into one. It will have the heat transfer surface on the bottom, the pump integrated above that, a flow through a finned radiator, then a series of pipes taking the cooled fluid back down into the heat transfer surface.

The unit itself will look very similar to a conventional large air cooler, with an extra large base.

I am taking three things that were once separate, and combining them into a single device. By your logic, this is patentable. On top of the patent issued to me, I can sue pretty much everyone. I will argue that the competitive options may use a large loop, but selling all three things together violates my patent.


Please, argue that what I am saying is wrong. Argue that this is somehow a derivative work, and it would never get a patent. My argument is that Asetek already has a similar patent. That is the problem I've got. They got a patent for something that should never have been issued a patent. The connectors can reasonably be patented. The pumps, depending upon operational methodology, can be patented. Bolting two existing components together is not novel or unique, and thus should not have been patentable.
Ultra sold that 5-6 years ago and its already been patented.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
419 (0.19/day)
Likes
116
Processor Intel i7-3820 @ 4.5GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte X79-UD7
Cooling Thermaltake Water Pro 2.0
Memory 16GB DDR3 1866
Video Card(s) Leadtek GeForce GTX 670 Reference
Storage Intel SSD530 120GB OS/BOOT, various mechanical drives for storage
Display(s) 2x Dell U2311H
Case Lian-Li PC-V1000
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar Essence ST
Power Supply Cooler Master Silent Pro Modular 600W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
#63
Bolting two existing components together is not novel or unique, and thus should not have been patentable.
Just about every complex machine is about bolting two or more existing, simpler components together. If we can't patent based on that logic, then by all rights we shouldn't be able to patent anything at all.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
283 (0.10/day)
Likes
45
Location
Honky Tonk Nashville, TN
#64
If Asetek even wins against any of the others, it will fail due to the prior Apple G5 LCS that uses the Panasonic pump+block combo. The time Asetek was even fileing for the patents, Panasonic was already in production.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#65
If Asetek even wins against any of the others, it will fail due to the prior Apple G5 LCS that uses the Panasonic pump+block combo. The time Asetek was even fileing for the patents, Panasonic was already in production.
The Panasonic system didn't use a pump/block combo, the pump was separate from the blocks.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
3,626 (1.09/day)
Likes
938
Location
Vietnam
System Name Gaming System / Laptop / HTPC
Processor i5 8600K @4.6Ghz / i5 540m / i7 970
Motherboard Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming / Acer / Shuttle sx58j3
Cooling CM Seidon 120 XL / Laptop Cooling / SE-903
Memory T Group Nighthawk (3000 MHz)/ 4GB DDR3 / 12gb DDR3
Video Card(s) Colorful 1080Ti / G210m / 7870XT
Storage 750G MX300 + 3TB HDDs / 250G Ultra II /250G 850 EVO
Display(s) Dell U2515H + Asus VX239H/ 15.6" Laptop Screen / 720p 42" Plasma TV
Case Cooler master HAF 922 / Laptop Case / Corsair Air 240
Audio Device(s) On Board Realtek
Power Supply Andyson N700 Titanium / Laptop Power / ACBell 700 W
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard CM Quickfire XT (Cherry MX Reds)
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Firestrike = xxxxx Timespy = 9097 Heaven = xxxx
#66
It looks like the pump and block are together. Along with the radiator, that is.x

 

Grnfinger

New Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
637 (0.18/day)
Likes
213
Location
Canada
System Name Tahiti Treat
Processor i7 4770K @ 4500MHz
Motherboard Asus Maximus VI Hero
Cooling Custom H20
Memory Patriot Viper 8GB @ 1866MHz
Video Card(s) 2X Sapphire 7870XT (Tahiti Core) @ 1150/1500 CrossFire
Storage 2 x Intel 120GB 520 Series SSD Raid0 # 2x Seagate 1TB Raid0 # 1 WD 2TB EARS
Display(s) 3 x 22" Eyefinity
Case Cosmos S Custom
Audio Device(s) Asus X-FI
Power Supply Corsair AX860i
Software Win7 64Bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6848547
#67
looks very heavy
 

Norton

Moderator & WCG-TPU Captain
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
12,679 (5.80/day)
Likes
36,251
Location
USA
System Name My Fortress/Trish (WCG)/Julia (WCG)/Ella (WCG)/Junior(WCG)/Cruncher 1 & 2/Kreij (WCG)
Processor Ryzen 1700X/i7-970/2600K/i7-980X/3930k/Opteron 6168x4/Ryzen 1600X/FX-8350
Motherboard X370 Taichi/ ASUS R3E/Asus P8P67 Pro/P9X79 Pro/EVGA X58 SLI 3/SuperMicro 4P
Cooling NH-D14/Phanteks/NH-U14S/H70/DeepCool/CM 212+ (x4)/NH-U14S/CM212
Memory 16GB GSkill TridentZ-3200 (1700X), 16GB GSkill FlareX-2400 (1600X),... various...., 4P- 16x1GB
Video Card(s) RX 580/HD 4670/HD 7770/HD 7770/HD 7770/onboard/HD 7770/onboard
Storage WD 500GB SSD/Seagate 2TB SSHD, everything else is Western Digital (mostly)
Display(s) Dell U2414H & 2409W / Dell 2208WFP (shared)
Case Silverstone FT01B/Source 530/Corsair 230T/Define XL R2/Silverstone FT05/Define R4/custom
Audio Device(s) on board (All)
Power Supply Corsair HX850/TX650/CS650M/X Gold 750/EVGA P2 850/X Gold 1050/HX650
Mouse Logitech G300s
Keyboard Thermaltake Challenger Prime (Great for $30!!!)
Software Win 7 Home 64 (Win 10 Pro 64)/Win Pro 64 or Ubuntu 12.04 LTS/14.04 LTS/17.04
Benchmark Scores Why sit on the Bench when you can get in the game and Crunch!!!
#68
Last edited:

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#69
It looks like the pump and block are together. Along with the radiator, that is.x

http://img.techpowerup.org/130722/kuehlblock.jpg
I owned one of these, look at it from a different angle, the pump is clearly completely separate from the waterblocks. In fact, anyone into watercooling will recognize the pump they used.;)



Here's another one:

http://img.techpowerup.org/130722/Xig AIO.jpg
XIGMATEK AIO-S80DP

*EDIT- Here's an Easter Egg- click Xigmatek's product page for this :laugh:
http://www.xigmatek.com/product/liquid-aios80dp.php
True, but that came out in 2007, long after Asetek's patent, and the pump was still technically a separate unit from the block.
 
Last edited:

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
26,568 (6.38/day)
Likes
7,468
Location
Houston
System Name Team Blue
Processor 5960X@4.8 1.42v
Motherboard Asus X99M-WS
Cooling EK Supremecy EVO, MCR220-Stack+MCR220+MCR320, D5-PWM+EK X-RES 140
Memory 4x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL16
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's+ EVGA reference 1080Ti soon to be under water
Storage Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron
Keyboard Thermaltake Poseidon ZX
Software W10P
Benchmark Scores Zoom zoom mofo
#70
Its a ddc1t with the noise isolator block at the bottom. I had one myself.
 

tigger

I'm the only one
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
10,476 (2.44/day)
Likes
1,673
System Name Black to the Core MKIV
Processor Intel I7 6700k
Motherboard Asus Z170 Pro Gaming socket 1151
Cooling NZXT Kraken X61 280mm radiator
Memory 2x8gb Corsair vengeance LPX 2400 DDR4
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon R9 290 4gb ddr5
Storage Patriot Blast 120gb ssd Boot and WD10EADX-22TDHB0 1TB Data
Display(s) Dell 2408WFP 24" 1920x1200
Case Nzxt IS 340
Audio Device(s) Asus xonar dsx pci-e
Power Supply Corsair CX750
Mouse Logitech G502
Software Win 10 Pro x64
#71
I'd like to find one of them in a market for a tenner :p
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
3,626 (1.09/day)
Likes
938
Location
Vietnam
System Name Gaming System / Laptop / HTPC
Processor i5 8600K @4.6Ghz / i5 540m / i7 970
Motherboard Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming / Acer / Shuttle sx58j3
Cooling CM Seidon 120 XL / Laptop Cooling / SE-903
Memory T Group Nighthawk (3000 MHz)/ 4GB DDR3 / 12gb DDR3
Video Card(s) Colorful 1080Ti / G210m / 7870XT
Storage 750G MX300 + 3TB HDDs / 250G Ultra II /250G 850 EVO
Display(s) Dell U2515H + Asus VX239H/ 15.6" Laptop Screen / 720p 42" Plasma TV
Case Cooler master HAF 922 / Laptop Case / Corsair Air 240
Audio Device(s) On Board Realtek
Power Supply Andyson N700 Titanium / Laptop Power / ACBell 700 W
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard CM Quickfire XT (Cherry MX Reds)
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Firestrike = xxxxx Timespy = 9097 Heaven = xxxx
#72
I owned one of these, look at it from a different angle, the pump is clearly completely separate from the waterblocks. In fact, anyone into watercooling will recognize the pump they used.;)

http://www.the620guy.com/Images/ebay/2011-08-15/Apple G5 Dual 2-7GHz 512K 5.JPG



True, but that came out in 2007, long after Asetek's patent, and the pump was still technically a separate unit from the block.
Couldn't it be argues that as they are bolted together, it is essentially a single unit rather than separate pieces? The tech in the swiftech units does seem different as in the pump has been opened at the bottom and had the waterblock bolted on, but is it a big enough difference?

The meat of their patent seems to cover any type of integrated heatsink, block (+rad), can certain aspects of a patent be invalidated whilst keeping the individual components intact?
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
5,129 (1.38/day)
Likes
1,209
Location
Nelson B.C. Canada
System Name Blacknet
Processor E5-1650 Xeon @ 4.5Ghz
Motherboard Asus P9X79 Pro
Cooling Noctua NH-D14/7case fans
Memory 32gb Gskill 1866 Cas9
Video Card(s) Asus Strix GTX970 OC
Storage 2x Toshiba 3TB, Seagate 2TB, 2x EVO 850 250GB
Display(s) 27" Asus VS278Q 1ms
Case Antec 1200
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z + AKG Q701 Studio Monitors
Power Supply XFX XTR 750 Gold
Mouse Corsair Vengeance M95
Keyboard Cheap Azio
Software Kubuntu 17.10, Win7 x64 SP1 Ultimate
Benchmark Scores Average....
#73
Having a hard time getting this... aren't all closed loop cooling systems pretty much the same darn thing? Weird.....
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
268 (0.12/day)
Likes
25
Processor 3770k
Motherboard Z77 Sabertooth
Cooling Cryorig C1
Memory Crucial 2x8GB
Video Card(s) GTX 670 4GB
Storage 512GB Crucial MX100
Display(s) Asus 27"
Case NZXT S340
Audio Device(s) Audiotrack Prodigy Cube
Power Supply AX650
#74
Having a hard time getting this... aren't all closed loop cooling systems pretty much the same darn thing? Weird.....
Yes they are, Swiftech H220 and CM Eisberg is not a closed loop. They are watercooling kits, that is pre-built for your convenience.

This is basically gone too far in my books by Asetek. I see the reason to sue Coolit, which is a copy of theirs.
But Swiftech I do not see it, when they been doing this for so long.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,281 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,379
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#75
Couldn't it be argues that as they are bolted together, it is essentially a single unit rather than separate pieces? The tech in the swiftech units does seem different as in the pump has been opened at the bottom and had the waterblock bolted on, but is it a big enough difference?

The meat of their patent seems to cover any type of integrated heatsink, block (+rad), can certain aspects of a patent be invalidated whilst keeping the individual components intact?
Being bolted together into a single functioning system is different then making them one solid unit. If you can pull a piece out and the piece still works as it is intended, then it is still technically a separate part. In Asetek's case, the waterblock becomes part of the pump and the pump becomes part of the waterblock, the two will not function separately.

And yes, patent judges can pick apart patents invalidating some parts while upholding others.

Having a hard time getting this... aren't all closed loop cooling systems pretty much the same darn thing? Weird.....
Yes they are, Swiftech H220 and CM Eisberg is not a closed loop. They are watercooling kits, that is pre-built for your convenience.

This is basically gone too far in my books by Asetek. I see the reason to sue Coolit, which is a copy of theirs.
But Swiftech I do not see it, when they been doing this for so long.
This isn't about closed loop coolers, it is about the pump/block combo(and maybe the special fittings).