Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
The Propeller, PS3 and Parallel Processing Corporation..... is there anything — Parallax Forums

The Propeller, PS3 and Parallel Processing Corporation..... is there anything

sharpiesharpie Posts: 150
edited 2007-08-02 00:30 in Propeller 1
Sony is getting sued by Parallel Processing Corporation of Newport Beach over it's 'Cell Processor'·since the company alleges that it violates patents for 'syncronized processing with shared memory'...· The suite was filed on July 26th...·· Is Parallax at risk too?· That company is seeking an injunction against all sales of the PS3, pretty aggressive.· I only mention this for further amusement in consideration of the discussion recently with the fellow that claims to have invented the pchip prior to parallax.. =)

http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/31/sony-sued-again-for-patent-violation-injunction-sought-on-ps3-sales/

Comments

  • Paul BakerPaul Baker Posts: 6,351
    edited 2007-07-31 22:51
    If you look at the independent claims 1 and 6, on this page, you'll see that it does not really describe the architecture of the Propeller, so I would say it's not very likely. I don't know the details of the cell architecture, so I don't know if there suit has merit.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Paul Baker
    Propeller Applications Engineer

    Parallax, Inc.
  • Fred HawkinsFred Hawkins Posts: 997
    edited 2007-07-31 23:17
    In the future, after our Cultural Revolution, our cars will run on lawyers.
  • DufferDuffer Posts: 374
    edited 2007-08-01 01:16
    Bring on the Cultural Revolution!

    "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers".

    Said by the character "Dick The Butcher" from Shakespear's Henry VI, part 2, describing the first step to be taken to achieve the perfect society.
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2007-08-01 01:24
    Yep. It's not Propeller at all.

    (thankfully)

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
  • rjo_rjo_ Posts: 1,825
    edited 2007-08-01 22:11
    IBM's legal department will put a stop to this kind of nonsense. Parallax is safe... and Parallax is such a good corporate citizen that everyone else would jump on anyone that tried to touch them.
  • Paul BakerPaul Baker Posts: 6,351
    edited 2007-08-01 22:15
    Wish it were that simple, but everyone is vulnerable to patent trolls.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Paul Baker
    Propeller Applications Engineer

    Parallax, Inc.
  • rjo_rjo_ Posts: 1,825
    edited 2007-08-01 22:16
    Have your guys give New York a call... it might be that simple.
  • Fred HawkinsFred Hawkins Posts: 997
    edited 2007-08-01 22:41
    Paul Baker (Parallax) said...
    Wish it were that simple, but everyone is vulnerable to patent trolls.
    True. I was googling '3d print lenticular screen' yesterday and was immediately up to my·chin in·legalese. It's no wonder no one does anything really cool with 3d imaging.
  • rjo_rjo_ Posts: 1,825
    edited 2007-08-02 00:30
    Fred...

    The other problem is that the system tends to be slightly corrupt. The only way I can see anyone causing any real problems for Parallax is if someone is on the take. Occasionally, some of our better agencies get befuddled by it all... where to start? If anyone gets through round 1 with Parallax by definition ... someone is dirty...the Parallax model is important enough that any real problem should trip some real triggers in one of our finer agencies.

    About the lenticular screens...

    Actually lenticular screens are prior art going back to the beginning of the last century. The problem is that a patent was given for image interleaving... something that is really obvious... and is actually a computer version of an interleaved (interlaced) TV signal. The patent was granted, it stuck through testing. Now that we have a new standard, which precludes patents for "the obvious," I'd like to see this challenged again. I don't have the bucks... but I'd be willing to create the fuss.

    Rich
Sign In or Register to comment.