catfishtx :
Grandmastersexsay :
catfishtx :
So, what's to keep some Intel engineers from obtaining a sample of said chip and reverse engineering it? Now Intel could make an ARM compatible chip with no license fees.
The same thing that stops them now, patents.
AMD reverse engineered the i386 (Am386) and i486 (Am486) while its litigation with Intel was still going on. They were not copies, but they were compatible, and ran the same software. That is why Intel switched to names for its products instead of numbers, you can't patent numbers. There are quite a few examples of one company reverse engineering another company's product that do not infringe on the original company's patents.
You are confusing patents and trademarks.
AMD was given a perpetual licence to the base 80386 patents used in AMD's 80386 clone as part of an anti-trust lawsuit against Intel in 1991.
Other companies either performed clean-room reimplementations aimed at binary compatibility while avoiding patent infringement, licensed the necessary patents, or designed microprocessors from the ground up purely based on instruction set references.
The 80386 trademark was rejected because it had fallen into common usage. Intel had not tried to trademark the 8080, 8086, 80186, or 80286 and this led to the 386 and 486 trademarks being rejected. They were essentially model numbers in the same way that the 7400 series ICs were model numbers.