Patent Law

Fuddy Daddy

By Gary Odom and Jordan Kuhn

Advanced Micro Devices, playing David to Intel's Goliath, is struggling to stay afloat. AMD is preparing to spin off its manufacturing operations into a separate company, tentatively called the Foundry Company. AMD will then focus purely on designing processor chips. This past week, Intel sent a letter to AMD, requesting a meeting to air out whether AMD's plan would violate patent cross-licensing agreements between the two. One agreement was signed in 1976, the other in 2001.

FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. Spreading FUD is a rabbit punch corporate propaganda move to weaken a rival or otherwise gain competitive advantage.

Intel's Bruce Sewell (pictured) denies spreading FUD. The point of such FUD would be to confuse shareholders, having them vote against the spinoff, and damage AMD's corporate viability.

Under the proposed plan, AMD would take a 34.2% ownership stake in the spinoff, but have a 50% voting interest, an odd arrangement that Sewell views as a contortion to cast Foundry Company as a subsidiary. Busybody Sewell said that AMD "has been negotiating through nothing less than a minefield to set this up." No FUD there.

Sewell said Intel is not contending that AMD is breaching the agreements. Intel is merely wondering whether Foundry Company would be inheriting the patent licenses, or how exactly AMD thinks the licensing agreements cover both companies. As in, who could we sue? No FUD there.

Mr. Sewell has been a hyperactive member of the Coalition for Patent Fairness. Busy boy.

Full post as published by The Patent Prospector on January 24, 2009 (boomark / email).