Ultra Products, Inc. is trying its hand at that most glorious of corporate traditions: suing the pants off one's competition. The maker of computer components is taking 22 -- yes, twenty two! -- of their competitors to court, claiming to have a patent for
modular power supplies since November of 2006. Ultra says they sent several warnings to the companies about the violations and is asking for the legal maximum of three times the damages. The suit actually doesn't accuse the companies of violating the patent, but of being an accomplice to end users who are violating the patent. Oh, and unless we're missing something here, Hewlett Packard filed a modular power supply patent in 2000 -- we certainly recall Screen Savers covering the devices way back in '99.
[Thanks, Mack]
posted Apr 13th 2008 5:43AM
+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.
True But James Dyson was hardly "The Small Guy" By that time his Vacume cleaners where already selling world wide and he was making a pretty penny...
BTW in no way am i dissing Dyson. The guys a genious fantastic. The real Rags to riches guy.
This is Tiger Direct's garbage generic brand, they basically take the lousiest components they can find, slap some bling on them and charge outrageous prices to idiots who don't know good PC parts brands. Check out a TD retail store sometime it's full of this junk.
I forgot to mention they also tried to sue Apple for naming a product "Tiger" and they're the ones who bought the CompUSA chain. Wikipedia "Systemax" for more info, and learn some names to avoid like the plague.
Well that company just convinced me what power supply I'm not using on my next system.
Ultra is off the list.
It should never have been on there in the first place. Only two brands on my list.
Corsair
PC Power and Cooling
Why shouldn't they sue? What's the point of patenting something if people can copy your idea and make money off of something you came up with?
Besides, as someone mentioned further up, if you don't take steps to protect your patent you lose it.
Its trademarks, not patents that you have defend. The classic example is kleenex.
@Matt:
thanks, guess I had that confused.
Actually... Apple had a modular PSU in the Quadra 950 back in 1992. I believe that falls in line with being a consumer-grade machine.
@ Old Mac Guy,
You're kidding right?
Wow! Apple invented the mouse, touch screen and now we just find out Apple is also the first to have "modular PSU" back in 1992!
:roll eyes.
Hey, did you "build" your own Mac? Upgraded it back 1992?
@kbnguy: You might want to research a bit first before you troll randomly.
http://www.recycledgoods.com/item/16915.aspx
Click the product image. The second image clearly shows a (at least partially) modular power supply.
while im not too crazy about any type of fanboy, I dont think that was his point, and I dont think he meant it like that.
"...being an accomplice to end users who are violating the patent."
Well, looks like I'm done buying from Ultra. They're too lazy / poor to sue end users directly, so they go after the manufacturers while still saying that users are the horrible party in all of this.
Users of engadget, I call for a boycott of Ultra's goods.
Ultra has every right to sue these companies. Ultra was the first company to release a modular power supply. I don't care who came up with the name 'modular power supply' since it's obvious that HPs patent sounds more like modular in the sense that you can switch it with something else in the PC case, kind of like Antec's modular 900 case. Anyway, God forbid a company that invents something actually gains from licensing it. I hate sue-happy companies, but as it mentions Ultra has tried to get into talks with many of the companies infringing on their patents but of course, since it's neither huge nor popular, the others figure it's better to take a chance in court than actually license the tech.
see this link, it refers to a review of a modular power supply for a pc way back in May 2003. Its a high grade power supply that was modified and sold by a company called Performance-PC's. Predates the patient by 3 year. As far as i am aware you cant patient something which already exists so looks like ultra screwed up. They obviously didnt do their research before filing for the patient
I personally really like Ultra Products. Hell My case is a Ultra Alumiunus. But this is a bit childish. They should have pointed out the patients and just asked for royalities (if patients are valid). They threatened and then went straight to sue.
Ultra in my book -2 (10 point scale).
The people from Tiger Direct are smart. This is most easiest way to disrupt or even monopoly the market even the first concept of modular power supply was not from them. I found out that some brand stop selling modular power supply by trying to buy a modular power supply from a small brand Rosewill. Their people told me that they and some other brands are discontinuing due to the law sue long time ago.
It is an easy way to stop competition. Microsoft is another example.
Do you like buy an Ultra product now?
Should we go to different forums and let everyone know about this practice?