Apple Ordered to Pay $21.7 Million in Patent Suit

If this rings any bells it's because Opti actually sued Apple successfully earlier this year. Ars Technica reports that, in a lawsuit filed in 2007, OPTi alleged Apple had infringed upon its patent covering "predictive snooping of cache memory for master-initiated accesses."

The technology, in general, uses predictive snooping of cache memory to speed up PCI bus data transfers, with the intent of maintaining a constant transfer rate. This year, a jury determined willful infringement and Apple was ordered to pay $19 million in "reasonable royalties."

Apple opposed the verdict, stating that it had not willfully infringed upon the patent and claiming the use of the technology is "obvious" and covered by prior art. This week, U.S. Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham granted Apple's motion for judgment as a matter of law that it did not willfully infringe Opti's patent for predictive cache snooping. However, according to Ars, Everingham issued a guilty verdict anyway, ordering the Cupertino-based Mac maker to pay a total of $21.7 million in damages.

Read the full story here.

Follow us on Twitter for more tech news and exclusive updates here.

Create a new thread in the US News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
36 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • 19Million??

    Overpriced @ $2500.00 Apple just needs to sell 7600 Mac Pro Workstations.
    23
  • this whole idea of patenting ideas that may show up in the future without a working model is total BS. The patent office needs to insist that if these companies are going to file for a patent that the company is obligated to first show a working model.
    23
  • 21.7 millions of dollars mean nothing to Apple consider they made billions of dollars in profit each quarter.
    19
  • Other Comments
  • 19Million??

    Overpriced @ $2500.00 Apple just needs to sell 7600 Mac Pro Workstations.
    23
  • 21.7 millions of dollars mean nothing to Apple consider they made billions of dollars in profit each quarter.
    19
  • this whole idea of patenting ideas that may show up in the future without a working model is total BS. The patent office needs to insist that if these companies are going to file for a patent that the company is obligated to first show a working model.
    23