Cooler Master Responds to Asetek Dispute

News
By Niels Broekhuijsen
published

Earlier we informed you that Asetek was suing Cooler Master, and Cooler Master has responded to these allegations.

Previously, we informed you that Asetek was suing Cooler Master. The problem in question was that, according to Asetek, the similarities between its cooling kits and Cooler Master's Seidon All-in-One liquid coolers were all a bit too present, thus it filed a lawsuit against Cooler Master: Suit No. 3:13-cv-00457-JSC.

The specifics of the suit came down to a request that Cooler Master must cease and desist the production and sale of the Seidon 120M, 120XL, and 240M kits. The biggest similarity that was argued over was the pump, which Asetek felt was far too similar to its own design.

In the meantime, Cooler Master has responded to these allegations with the statement below:

Whereas, Cooler Master’s customers are concerned about whether ourliquid-cooling radiator products (Seidon Serials) have infringed theAsetek’s patents, we hereby declare:In terms of Asetek filed the patent litigation in U.S. to Cooler Master on January 31, 2013, the said litigation is only on the preliminary stage. Cooler Master has started to understand and investigate the accused products for seeming patent issue. Apparently, Asetek will not assert its right in Non-US area now due to the patents -in-suit are US patents. Therefore, customers in Non-US area have no infringement issue. As you might know , it’s a typical means for competitor to bring a lawsuit against its rival. Asetek not only sued Cooler Master but Coolit. Its main purpose is to block its competitors to enter the market and gain the prime time profits. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or suffering incurred to our valued customers. Meanwhile, we assure that Cooler Master will be actively responsible for all the related legal liability if any IP issue arose herein.

The statement was released by Charles Chiu, Vice President of Cooler Master, on March 15, 2013.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Niels Broekhuijsen
Niels Broekhuijsen

Niels Broekhuijsen is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware US. He reviews cases, water cooling and pc builds.

See more Cooling News
13 Comments Comment from the forums
  • mouse24
    it’s a typical means for competitor to bring a lawsuit against its rival. Asetek not only sued Cooler Master but Coolit. Its main purpose is to block its competitors to enter the market and gain the prime time profits.

    Everyone interested in this story knows this. It just sounds like whining to me. Surprised they didn't go down the typical "We will prove our innocence and strive to protect justice" etc. Instead its "wahh, asetek is a big meany"

    Kinda sad to see from a company.
    Reply
  • vmem
    ^ +1

    However, they did make their third point and pledged to be fully responsible to all their customers, which is at least a good move and makes me feel better about my current and any future CM products
    Reply
  • blazorthon
    mouse24Everyone interested in this story knows this. It just sounds like whining to me. Surprised they didn't go down the typical "We will prove our innocence and strive to protect justice" etc. Instead its "wahh, asetek is a big meany"Kinda sad to see from a company.
    At least they're not lying to us. If they are infringing and they said otherwise, then they'd be lying and that's far worse than accusing Asetek of patent trolling.
    Reply
  • Firedrops
    These 3 statements barely say anything.
    Reply
  • MaXimus421
    Take patent's away and someone will copy your design.

    Embrace patent's and it becomes a tool to monopolize a market with and hinders the evolution and innovation of technology.

    Is there no middle ground here?
    Reply
  • blazorthon
    10538119 said:
    Take patent's away and someone will copy your design.

    Embrace patent's and it becomes a tool to monopolize a market with and hinders the evolution and innovation of technology.

    Is there no middle ground here?

    Looking at the two ideas as you put them, the problem seems obvious: Both systems are abused. If companies were more reasonable and fair overall, then that shouldn't be an issue. If they all wanted to, I see no reason for why they couldn't work out such issues as this quickly and pretty much painlessly for all parties involved.
    Reply
  • sam buddy
    MaXimus421Take patent's away and someone will copy your design. Embrace patent's and it becomes a tool to monopolize a market with and hinders the evolution and innovation of technology.Is there no middle ground here?There could be but, no, there isn't. And the reason for that: patent laws are created behind the scenes, with many companies lobbying and pushing legislation towards their interests. As a result, the laws hinder innovation, favor monopolisation, deny more and more consumer rights, and increase profitability for those specific companies. Companies that are "rich" enough to step in the law making process, and then sue the competition, and us consumers if need be, down to our knees.
    Hell, we're living in interesting times. Everything around us looks like it's crumbling into dust.
    Reply
  • leandrodafontoura
    How the hell are will liquid system pumps not be similar? Take a look at Zalman, Swiftech etc.. they all have the same pump
    Reply
  • childofthekorn
    Why are these announcements sounding more like WWE? Pretty soon they're going to sponsor wrestlers to settle the disputes to continue just effing around with billions of dollars. At least we'd get entertainment out of it.
    Reply
  • DRosencraft
    MaXimus421Take patent's away and someone will copy your design. Embrace patent's and it becomes a tool to monopolize a market with and hinders the evolution and innovation of technology.Is there no middle ground here?
    Every system is flawed. The difference usually between a successful system and a failed one is the extent to which common sense retains control and abuse is limited. A good part of that is just basic decency - not stealing other peoples ideas, not overcharging for licensing. The system itself needs work as well, such as more clearly stated patents, prescribed arbitration regimes, limits on the length of time a patent can go unused by the first party, etc. But even these issues are ones which were left out originally in patent law because of the notion that smart people who create things would know how to talk to one another to avoid messes like this. It's not about who is right and wrong, but getting things done.
    Reply