4 ms·

Props to this guy. I just took a look at the patent (highly recommended), and it's fairly ridiculous. It's a 101 design to control a diode with a transistor.

by twtw 8y ago

deepnotderp 8y ago
Literally is a GaN xtor driving a laser diode. It's not like Velodyne has been doing that for years :/
simias 8y ago
It does look that way but then if that's the case why didn't anybody at Uber point that out during the lawsuit? From the article: >The patent describes how a laser diode can be configured to emit pulses of laser light using a circuit that includes an inductor and a gallium nitride transistor. That chance discovery helped spark a lawsuit in which Waymo accused Uber of patent infringement and of using lidar secrets supposedly stolen by engineer Anthony Levandowski. >In August 2017, Uber agreed to redesign its Fuji lidar not to infringe the 936 patent. If "some guy" with $6000 lying around could overturn most of the patent why couldn't Uber? That's the part that baffles me.
- C4stor 8y ago
  Maybe Uber is big enough that noone in the legal team even thought about asking for an engineer opinion on the claims to begin with ? You know, like "This thing is a matter for our department, we'll take of it for sure !"
- ben_w 8y ago
  Real life example from someone I know: They worked at a company which was only allowed to use certain DRM stuff if they used patent-protected encryption within the hardware. Therefore he invented some and worked with the company lawyer to get a patent. The patent lawyers’ job includes making the patent as general as possible. The lawyer did not understand the technology, and while broadening the patent claim they accidentally changed the patent into something which already existed - a binary adder, if I remember, certainly something that simple although the details are unimportant. None of this was relevant to my acquaintance nor their employer as the mere fact that they had a patent entitled them to use the DRM. Even lawyers are vulnerable to the game of telephone. Despite their reputation as vampires, they are very human.
  - thaumasiotes 8y ago
    This is a good answer to the question "why did Waymo have a patent that could be invalidated by one guy with $6000?" But it's a terrible answer to the question "if one guy with $6000 could get this patent invalidated, why couldn't Uber?"
    - 1_player 8y ago
      Probably because none of the lawyers on Uber's side had the credentials to stop and ask themselves "hey, is this even patentable?!" Nobody consulted any engineer. Just lawyers fighting each other, and the side with the biggest pockets won.
      - spydum 8y ago
        Absolutely believable - I’ve been amazed at some of the foolishness of general councils at LARGE corps. They may know law, but they can suck at getting details right about engineering problems. Heck even when it comes to law, can’t tell you how many times I have heard “we will need to consult outside council”..
        1_player 8y ago
        See, I'm being absolutely cynical and tongue-in-cheek here, but my understanding about the modern law is that lawyers aren't fighting for the "truth" or "common good" nor they are in the "righting wrongs" business. Their only job is doing whatever the client wants done. A _good lawyer_ wins a case even when it's total bollocks. The fact that it is bollocks is not a concern at any level. https://youtu.be/oYj7q_by_2E?t=5m56s https://youtu.be/oYj7q_by_2E?t=5m56s
        rcxdude 8y ago
        This is how adversarial justice systems are supposed to operate. The idea being that you get lawyers advocating in the best possible way for either side, so the argument is 'fair'. This is in comparison to an inquisitorial system, where one party is charged with investigating the case and exposing the 'truth'. This is more prone to bias and ability on that one party but it does generally mean that the level of resources each side has matters less.
upofadown 8y ago
Well it does incorporate a voltage boost converter as part of it's operation but yeah, people have been doing that sort of thing since forever. Any time you have a requirement for a higher voltage than the supply and you are pulsing something this design will just fall out from that. Not an invention... The Velodyne driver circuits are also entirely straightforward. The characteristics of inductors and capacitors are pretty well known by now. Apparently you can get a patent for using them in entirely obvious ways.

Props to this guy. I just took a look at the patent (highly recommended), and it's fairly ridiculous. It's a 101 design to control a diode with a transistor.

by twtw 8y ago

Props to this guy. I just took a look at the patent (highly recommended), and it's fairly ridiculous. It's a 101 design to control a diode with a transistor.

deepnotderp 8y ago

Literally is a GaN xtor driving a laser diode. It's not like Velodyne has been doing that for years :/

simias 8y ago

It does look that way but then if that's the case why didn't anybody at Uber point that out during the lawsuit? From the article: >The patent describes how a laser diode can be configured to emit pulses of laser light using a circuit that includes an inductor and a gallium nitride transistor. That chance discovery helped spark a lawsuit in which Waymo accused Uber of patent infringement and of using lidar secrets supposedly stolen by engineer Anthony Levandowski. >In August 2017, Uber agreed to redesign its Fuji lidar not to infringe the 936 patent. If "some guy" with $6000 lying around could overturn most of the patent why couldn't Uber? That's the part that baffles me.

C4stor 8y ago
Maybe Uber is big enough that noone in the legal team even thought about asking for an engineer opinion on the claims to begin with ? You know, like "This thing is a matter for our department, we'll take of it for sure !"
ben_w 8y ago
Real life example from someone I know: They worked at a company which was only allowed to use certain DRM stuff if they used patent-protected encryption within the hardware. Therefore he invented some and worked with the company lawyer to get a patent. The patent lawyers’ job includes making the patent as general as possible. The lawyer did not understand the technology, and while broadening the patent claim they accidentally changed the patent into something which already existed - a binary adder, if I remember, certainly something that simple although the details are unimportant. None of this was relevant to my acquaintance nor their employer as the mere fact that they had a patent entitled them to use the DRM. Even lawyers are vulnerable to the game of telephone. Despite their reputation as vampires, they are very human.
- thaumasiotes 8y ago
  This is a good answer to the question "why did Waymo have a patent that could be invalidated by one guy with $6000?" But it's a terrible answer to the question "if one guy with $6000 could get this patent invalidated, why couldn't Uber?"
  - 1_player 8y ago
    Probably because none of the lawyers on Uber's side had the credentials to stop and ask themselves "hey, is this even patentable?!" Nobody consulted any engineer. Just lawyers fighting each other, and the side with the biggest pockets won.
    - spydum 8y ago
      Absolutely believable - I’ve been amazed at some of the foolishness of general councils at LARGE corps. They may know law, but they can suck at getting details right about engineering problems. Heck even when it comes to law, can’t tell you how many times I have heard “we will need to consult outside council”..
      - 1_player 8y ago
        See, I'm being absolutely cynical and tongue-in-cheek here, but my understanding about the modern law is that lawyers aren't fighting for the "truth" or "common good" nor they are in the "righting wrongs" business. Their only job is doing whatever the client wants done. A _good lawyer_ wins a case even when it's total bollocks. The fact that it is bollocks is not a concern at any level. https://youtu.be/oYj7q_by_2E?t=5m56s https://youtu.be/oYj7q_by_2E?t=5m56s
        rcxdude 8y ago
        This is how adversarial justice systems are supposed to operate. The idea being that you get lawyers advocating in the best possible way for either side, so the argument is 'fair'. This is in comparison to an inquisitorial system, where one party is charged with investigating the case and exposing the 'truth'. This is more prone to bias and ability on that one party but it does generally mean that the level of resources each side has matters less.

upofadown 8y ago

Well it does incorporate a voltage boost converter as part of it's operation but yeah, people have been doing that sort of thing since forever. Any time you have a requirement for a higher voltage than the supply and you are pulsing something this design will just fall out from that. Not an invention... The Velodyne driver circuits are also entirely straightforward. The characteristics of inductors and capacitors are pretty well known by now. Apparently you can get a patent for using them in entirely obvious ways.