3 ms·

You can win a lawsuit and still lose so much time and money on the way that you are worse off afterwards. Vice versa you can cause your opponents so much troub

You can win a lawsuit and still lose so much time and money on the way that you are worse off afterwards. Vice versa you can cause your opponents so much trouble with lawsuits that - even though you don't win them - you are better off than them afterwards.

rhaps0dy 9y ago
But Microsoft is bigger than Intel. So if anything, they will cause trouble to Intel.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  It's not just about direct litigation costs. If they could e.g. block a major product release, the damage becomes much greater.
- std_throwaway 9y ago
  Both can afford to spend hundreds of millions on a lawsuit. The lawsuit will be only a part of the budget for both and non-existential. So I don't think that the size matters here. It would be different if the lawsuit is so expensive that one party could go bankrupt due to it. This isn't about right and wrong. It's about money. Who has to pay how much to the other party? Both parties think they are better off if they fight. Both parties think they could win money in the end. It's a gamble in the courtroom.
  - chongli 9y ago
    The stakes could potentially present an existential risk to Intel. Imagine if Microsoft won and transitioned all Windows customers to ARM. That would be a huge blow to Intel's market!
Deinos 9y ago
Very true. Often a larger actor with even larger pockets can turn a winnable battle into a losing war of attrition. In this case, it appears that Cyrix came out on the other side of the battle in a better position for their win. It would seem it was their later acquisition by National Semiconductor that eventually snuffed them out.
warmwaffles 9y ago
Basically what happened between Intel and AMD.
rasz 9y ago
Creative vs Aureal Semiconductor is a good example. Creative sued them multiple times while at the same time stealing their patented technology! Creative lost every single lawsuit, but legal costs forced Aureal into bankruptcy. Creative bought assets on the cheap.

rhaps0dy 9y ago

But Microsoft is bigger than Intel. So if anything, they will cause trouble to Intel.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
It's not just about direct litigation costs. If they could e.g. block a major product release, the damage becomes much greater.
std_throwaway 9y ago
Both can afford to spend hundreds of millions on a lawsuit. The lawsuit will be only a part of the budget for both and non-existential. So I don't think that the size matters here. It would be different if the lawsuit is so expensive that one party could go bankrupt due to it. This isn't about right and wrong. It's about money. Who has to pay how much to the other party? Both parties think they are better off if they fight. Both parties think they could win money in the end. It's a gamble in the courtroom.
- chongli 9y ago
  The stakes could potentially present an existential risk to Intel. Imagine if Microsoft won and transitioned all Windows customers to ARM. That would be a huge blow to Intel's market!

Deinos 9y ago

Very true. Often a larger actor with even larger pockets can turn a winnable battle into a losing war of attrition. In this case, it appears that Cyrix came out on the other side of the battle in a better position for their win. It would seem it was their later acquisition by National Semiconductor that eventually snuffed them out.

warmwaffles 9y ago

Basically what happened between Intel and AMD.

rasz 9y ago

Creative vs Aureal Semiconductor is a good example. Creative sued them multiple times while at the same time stealing their patented technology! Creative lost every single lawsuit, but legal costs forced Aureal into bankruptcy. Creative bought assets on the cheap.