3 ms·
> Instruction set can't be pantented This is simply false, as far as Intel is concerned. You can't even emulate x86 (therefore infringing 0 hardware patents) w
by verall 9y ago
> Instruction set can't be pantented
This is simply false, as far as Intel is concerned. You can't even emulate x86 (therefore infringing 0 hardware patents) without expected heavy litigation from Intel.
AFAIK the actual x86 patents have expired but none of the extensions have (x86-64, SSE, ...)
- Nokinside 9y agoIntel naturally tries to threaten and extend patents as much as they can. But they ISA itself can't be patented. If you look their actual patents, they are all patents on implementation details or attempts to patent functions that instructions do.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago> "Intel naturally tries to threaten and extend patents as much as they can. But they ISA itself can't be patented." It is practically impossible to implement these extensions, such as SSE variants, without intel being able to make a case against you. So even if theoretically the ISA can't be patented, for all practical purposes they have the legal power to effectively prohibit a 3rd-party from implementing an x86 core.
- microcolonel 9y agox86-64 is AMD's IP, not Intel's. The proper name is AMD64.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago"AMD64" is simply a Trade Mark. But the problem being discussed is the separate IP issue of patents.