Ultra sues just about every other modular power supply manufacturer
By Terrence O'Brien 
posted April 13th 2008 5:43AM
posted April 13th 2008 5:43AM
[Thanks, Mack]
posted April 13th 2008 5:43AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
+1 for mentioning the screen savers
RIP techtv
Greatest show on the greatest network ever. RIP TechTV indeed. And screw Comcrap.
Whatever happened to companies turning a profit on, you know, their goods or services? Lately it seems that companies think it's OK to enhance their revenue--or even base their primary revenue on--suing. It's a disgusting practice and I wish there were a way we could curb it in the US. If I were a majority shareholder I would immediately call for the resignation of all executives in the company for pulling crap like this.
"3 times the maximum"
3 times the maximum? How can a certain amount be maximum if you can claim 3 times that amount? Isn't the 3x amount the real maximum if this is indeed the case?
Well the corpse is there still rotting it's called AOTS. (my apologies to Olivia!)
@Tinu:
If you read the article, it says the legal maximum that a patent violation suit can call for is three times the estimated damages.
Reading comprehension = FAIL
@Dave:
The article's wording got changed now. Reading Comprehension can't be fail if your comment gets the article changed....
For crying out loud. People are sueing left right and centre at the drop of a hat!
As a matter of fact, I bet someone, somewhere (probably in the USA) did sue someone for dropping their hat.
I am afraid I am going to have to sue you since I hold the patent on coming up with the idea of suing people who drop their hat. Sorry old boy.
Touche.
Well played Sir..... Well played indeed.
I take my hat off to you ;)
Be careful not to drop it.
"I am afraid I am going to have to sue you since I hold the patent on coming up with the idea of suing people who drop their hat. Sorry old boy."
Ah, but I have patented suing pleople who sue other people who drop their hat. Also, I patented the sentence "Sorry old boy". I also patented replying about suing, suing for replying, and replying with a sue; so I can sue for suing for replying to a sue, suing for suing a sue, suing and replying a sue with a reply.
Now sue me.
Say whaaaat?
OK, I'll sue myself for using "sue" as a noun.
I got you all beat...
I got a patent on "the process of creating a patent" so guess what, I'm suing everyone since the beginning of time! Every company with a patent anywhere is now my bitch! hahahahha
That's just silly.
Someone had to take it too far. Why. Why did you have to do that!?!?!
j/k :)
No, but there was a breakup just because I dropped my hat "on purpose" so I could look up that girl's skirt.
I'm suing ALL of you for beating YoJIMbo's dead horse.
Is this really at the drop of a hat? Have you reviewed the patents, their respective file histories, the alleged infringement, and the correspondende with the 22 companies? Ultra didn't just sue these companies out of the blue either ... the article states "Ultra says they sent several warnings to the companies about the violations."
I am against unmeritorious lawsuits as much as any other reader of Engadget. However, it seems as though the theme is that whenever a patent suit is filed the editors and the other readers conclude, at the drop of a hat, that the lawsuit is not warranted.
The fact that something was on screen savers in 1999/2000 is important and probably should be considered in front of the USPTO. However, the patent is issued and legally it has a presumption of validity. This art might be able to be used to start a third-party reexamination with the patent office, or used by the defendants at trial to invalidate the patent.
I have a question ... when would it be okay for a company to sue on a patent? Or, are you advocating that people hang them on their walls, use them as toilet paper, etc.?
The Patents:
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPATD501648
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT7133293
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT7313000
Holy shit dude: R E L A X!!!!!!
It may have escaped you but I was joking
lightheartedly
with my engadget friends.
I didin't understand, nor did I have the patience ot understand all the patent crap.
I merely wanted to make a funny comment, somewhat (but not really) relevant to the artcile, in order to make other readers laugh. Also I aim to get highest rank on every post :)
That is my formula for all comments. Check like the first 5 artciles on this site!!
There are about 7 highly ranked fun comments from my original post.
My work here is done.
I thought it was a funny comment, and did not mean to cause any trouble (although I did last night and I am still hung over ;-), but I have sensed anti-IP undertones on a lot of high tech blogs. Sometimes I wonder if all of the engineers and savvy tech people have been brainwashed by the companies that are lobbying congress to, essentially, weaken patent law.
My confusion can be summed up in the following question:
Why should we be trying to devalue intellectual property when it is the only thing the United States makes anymore?
Lol, no trouble caused.
Thats the bad thing about text, can't tell people'es tones.
As for your point, it is valid.
I think at the end of the day average joes don't look kindly on million dollar companies who sue other companies to get more money when we're all stuck with our daily grind for money.
Hence most of us are biased against articles like this, even though we may be wrong!
Well, if they can prove that they patented the idea they should be compensated... but these other power supply makers have lawyers who probably looked for patents regarding modular power supplies and felt that their product was not a violation of these patents, so the case shouldn't last too long
Also, isn't there a law that you have to actually enforce your patents if you know they are being broken? Sorta like watching and waiting for everyone to screw up before suing them...
Wait, never mind, it says they sent notices... that should cover the last part if they were sent at or before the release of the product
Wait are we the end users? Are they planning to take us to court?
Let 'em try. I wanna see those bastards sue me for owning two modular power supplies that AREN'T made by Ultra.
I own an Ultra PSU. They're high quality. Plus as a bonus my cables glow under UV. yay.
You have never seen what quality is really like. I own a PC Power and Cooling 1KW-SR, this thing could be run over by a tank and still power a Prescott based quad SLI system using 10x SAS raid0. . Ultra is crap, they have a high failure rate.
You do realize that most of Ultra is crap. Even some of their expensive 750W PSU don't deserve even a 300W rating.
I do have to say though that the Ultra XVS 700W Modular PSU they pack in with their Ultra GRID case is excellent. It's much better than their more expensive PSU and it's on 100(with that case, and it's a good case too!).
No. You probably don't have enough money to make it worth their while. They want the other companies money.
They are suing the other power supply makers for "contributory infringement." To win on a patent infringement suit, in most cases has to show "direct infringement." Here, the customers might "directly infringe" the patent but the power supply makers "contribute" to the direct infringement by producing the parts that are used to infringe. For instance, I am just guessing and have not reviewed the actual circumstances of the case, Ultra might have a claim that says something like "We claim a method of configuring a power supply to only use the needed cords by inserting the cord into a slot on the power supply." This is not a function performed at the factory by the PSU manufacturer, this is performed at home when the user installs the unit. However, the power supply manufacturers make these parts knowing that they will be used by the end user in an infringing manner.
See 35 U.S.C. 217(c)
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35_U_S_C_271.htm
Good thing my power supply is in my computer case and not in the path of a tank?
My computer cost me $700 2-3 years ago and the Ultra provides plenty of power for the system (its a 500W with at least 20A on the +12V rail) So who cares if its not PC Power and Cooling? Its not in my budget and overpowered for my system anyway.
So with the power I consume, price I paid, and the modular gimmick cleaning up my case; I'm going to stick with calling it high quality. Thanks.
Why aren't they suing Radio Shack who sells those wall wart power supplies with the interchangeable modular TIPS?
Hey stop mentioning the company that I work for on this website or they will websesnse it and I won't be able to read this at work.
@Matt: Then maybe you shouldn't be reading it at work?
Actually, funny you should mention that. Hop-on, the makers of the disposable cell phones in the other thread, have patent on that revolutionary device: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6994592.html
The even suggest that you may make a retractable cord!
My mothers 1970's Hoover Concept 1 had a RETRACTABLE POWER CORD, why isn't Hoover suing them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k577gtbkHi8
My 'puter is too old to know what a modular power supply is.
maybe these ultra power supplies have gotten better but i bought a modular power supply a few years ago from them and it was terrible. the cables were waaay too stiff and made cable management impossible, and the fan made a pulsating whining noise that was far louder than any other component. again maybe i have a bad first impression of the company but it seems to me like if you file for a patent for something and are unable to deliver a quality product based on that patent then the next company can come along and build a patented "modular power supply of good quality" and it would be different. and yes i will testify.
I'll take an Enermax over these any day.
Modular power supplies have been around since the early 1980's. I have worked on many an IBM server in the last 15 years that are has a modular PSU. The shows you how screwed up the US patent system really is.
Just realised what the patent is for, it isnt for a modular PSU (as that cant be patented due to prior art), its for "putting a modular PSU in a consumer grade machine"....SIGH
I was thinking the same thing. I work in computer recycling and we always get those old IBM servers. When i read it i was like "huh? how can they patent in 2006, what's been around for 20 years?" But then i saw your reply to yourself.
I'd say that HP patent trumps their "consumer grade" point. HP mentions specifically a "tower computer" and defines it.
Of course the link Big John points to shows prior art from the Apple Quadra 950 PS and should make everyone think.
Actually, the PS2 from IBM had a modular power supply - and it was "consumer grade".
Never heard of these ultra people. i live in the uk and as far as i know fairly soon the whole patent thing is going to have to be redrawn cos its stupid.
i heard some singer patented their vioce and it went through on the grounds of having herself unique voice. cant remember who she was but she couldnt sing anyway.
i just dont get why anything can be patented and i agree that i thought theses modular designs have been around a long time. ultra are going to make alot of money if they can sue all of them
you mean Madonna? :-P
So how long before everyone who purchased one of these power supplies gets hauled into court for being in violation of this patent? I for one am ready to settle already, where can I send my check?
Erm Moduler designs have been going for alot longer than 2 years... And who is this Ultra shizers?
This lawsuit just convinced me to never buy an Ultra product.
I am very happy with my Corsair mod. PSU, and have recommended it to many other people in tech forums who have come back and said they were happy.
Screw Ultra.
The real tragedy of the patent system is when the small guy actually comes up with a real invention and the big companies steal the idea with impunity. To defend it, he then must spend money on legal cases he can ill afford.
My mind recalls James Dyson v Hoover. Thankfully, Mr Dyson won, but only after a difficult battle.