Imagination Technologies Remains For Sale as No Progress Made in Dispute With Apple

[ApfelKuchen]

No-compete clauses are probably unenforceable against typical employees, as part of a routine employment contract. I'm not so sure they'd be unenforceable in the case of, say, a high-priced severance deal with a key employee (corporate officer, etc.).

 

[recoil80]

Actually it pretty much has to come out with A11. If not Apple will have a hard time reaching their goal of dropping Imagination.

I think you are right, I also expect the first Apple GPU to come with A11.
Next year they'll sell A11 chip based iPhones, and they'll continue to do it even in 2019 so in order to stop paying royalties to IT they need to have their GPU this year.

 

[iKen1]

If the British don't want to pay more, they should have thought of that before voting like a collection of xenophobic loonies.

Yes, because we so need a lesson in "voting like a collection of xenophobic loonies" from America. Looked in the mirror lately?
[doublepost=1499244147][/doublepost]

I think the fact that apple poached a shedload of Imagination Technologies employees is proof that apple have done wrong here.

They all relocated to Ca, not just for the sunny climate and more money.

So effectively you are saying that these employees are not capable of thinking up anything new. They're one trick pony's and have spent their brains at Imagination. Rather depressing world where once you've worked somewhere for a few years you are effectively a slave to that company because you couldn't possibly do a similar job anywhere else without violating patents.

 

[deany]

Yes, because we so need a lesson in "voting like a collection of xenophobic loonies" from America. Looked in the mirror lately?
[doublepost=1499244147][/doublepost]
So effectively you are saying that these employees are not capable of thinking up anything new. They're one trick pony's and have spent their brains at Imagination. Rather depressing world where once you've worked somewhere for a few years you are effectively a slave to that company because you couldn't possibly do a similar job anywhere else without violating patents.

They didn't just go to Ca for the weather and the cash, no doubt they were hand picked highly motivated and full of knowledge and ideas, knowledge and ideas that apple could use on their new Project.

 

[iKen1]

They didn't just go to Ca for the weather and the cash, no doubt they were hand picked highly motivated and full of knowledge and ideas, knowledge and ideas that apple could use on their new Project.

Yes, they were. But none of that says that they are incapable of doing that without violating the prior employers IP. People are not one trick pony's. They think and can solve problems, at least the ones you want working for you do.

 

[GaryMumford]

Brexit isn't an "excuse." A pound is worth fewer dollars than it was, so it takes more pounds to equal the same number of dollars. If the British don't want to pay more, they should have thought of that before voting like a collection of xenophobic loonies.

WOW! That's one extreme and uneducated comment right there!
Loonies, I have to agree 100%. Xenophobic loonies? NO!
Speaking of stupid voting and xenophobic loonies, How are things in the US with your new president?

 

[ApfelKuchen]

They didn't just go to Ca for the weather and the cash, no doubt they were hand picked highly motivated and full of knowledge and ideas, knowledge and ideas that apple could use on their new Project.

Your original statement definitely made it seem like you though it was a nefarious plot on Apple's part.

Plenty of British actors seem to go to CA for the weather and the cash - you can't say there's a lack of interesting theatrical and film productions in the UK.

If there was no other company in the UK that could offer comparable employment to the Imagination engineers, those interested in leaving for greener pastures might have had to leave, regardless of who next employed them.

Regardless of appearances, I don't think Apple behaves out of malice. They decide on a strategic path, and take the necessary steps - hire staff, acquire companies in order to acquire their IP and/or staff, etc. Since Apple isn't shy about buying companies for their IP, I'd guess that Apple has requirements for GPUs that are sufficiently different that Imagination's contribution wouldn't be worth the money.

What Apple does can be damaging, very damaging at times, to the businesses they work with. Of course, the relationship can also be very rewarding. That's the risk any smaller business takes when dancing with the 800-lb. gorilla. There's more than enough history of Apple changing vendor relationships, taking technologies in-house, etc., that no reasonable businessperson should expect that it couldn't happen to them.

 

[techwhiz]

Imagination insists that Apple is making "unsubstantiated assertions," as the iPhone maker has supposedly yet to present any evidence to prove that it will no longer require the British firm's technology, at least not without violating its patents, intellectual property, and confidential information.
​

That's not how it works. If Imagination thinks Apple is infringing its IP, then it has to prove it. Apple doesn't have to prove the reverse.

Actually you are not quite correct.
Apple has been licensing the technology.
If Apple has developed a clean room version of a GPU that doesn't violate patents they'll need to prove they are stealing.
I can't imagine Apple being able to not violate AMD, nVidia and IT with a new GPU architecture.
[doublepost=1499249186][/doublepost]

That is one of the silliest/stupidest claims ever. It would be like if Apple suddenly said "We won't be using Intel processors any more after 2019." and Intel sued claiming there was no way Apple could make a Mac without an Intel processor.

There are other mobile GPU providers out there, even if Apple doesn't develop their own. Why would Apple need to "present evidence" that they aren't going to use Imagination's technology? It would be one thing to claim "we have a contract that says Apple will continue to pay us through 2025" or something. But they're not claiming that. They're claiming there is no way Apple could make their products without Imagination property...

Because they have been making chips with the IT GPU on them.
Apple will need to open the "kimono" so to speak since they were privy to IT intellectual property.
They will need to prove a clean room approach. None of the engineers that worked on anything related to IT will be able to work on the new GPU.

Unless any of you have designed chips and IP, you don't get it.
It's not like swapping an Intel CPU for AMD.

 

[deany]

Your original statement definitely made it seem like you though it was a nefarious plot on Apple's part.

Plenty of British actors seem to go to CA for the weather and the cash - you can't say there's a lack of interesting theatrical and film productions in the UK.

If there was no other company in the UK that could offer comparable employment to the Imagination engineers, those interested in leaving for greener pastures might have had to leave, regardless of who next employed them.

Regardless of appearances, I don't think Apple behaves out of malice. They decide on a strategic path, and take the necessary steps - hire staff, acquire companies in order to acquire their IP and/or staff, etc. Since Apple isn't shy about buying companies for their IP, I'd guess that Apple has requirements for GPUs that are sufficiently different that Imagination's contribution wouldn't be worth the money.

What Apple does can be damaging, very damaging at times, to the businesses they work with. Of course, the relationship can also be very rewarding. That's the risk any smaller business takes when dancing with the 800-lb. gorilla. There's more than enough history of Apple changing vendor relationships, taking technologies in-house, etc., that no reasonable businessperson should expect that it couldn't happen to them.

Most if the British actors and actresses that go to Holywood always come back to Blity, they get homesick, miss the fish and chips!

Your original statement definitely made it seem like you though it was a nefarious plot on Apple's part.

Plenty of British actors seem to go to CA for the weather and the cash - you can't say there's a lack of interesting theatrical and film productions in the UK.

If there was no other company in the UK that could offer comparable employment to the Imagination engineers, those interested in leaving for greener pastures might have had to leave, regardless of who next employed them.

Regardless of appearances, I don't think Apple behaves out of malice. They decide on a strategic path, and take the necessary steps - hire staff, acquire companies in order to acquire their IP and/or staff, etc. Since Apple isn't shy about buying companies for their IP, I'd guess that Apple has requirements for GPUs that are sufficiently different that Imagination's contribution wouldn't be worth the money.

What Apple does can be damaging, very damaging at times, to the businesses they work with. Of course, the relationship can also be very rewarding. That's the risk any smaller business takes when dancing with the 800-lb. gorilla. There's more than enough history of Apple changing vendor relationships, taking technologies in-house, etc., that no reasonable businessperson should expect that it couldn't happen to them.

I don't think we can be in any doubt there has been funny business going on here.

Apple were (not sure if they still are) a shareholder in Imagination Technologies. They also tried to buy Imagination Technologies, the negotiations fell though for whatever reason.
Next minute key staff are leaving, in their droves.

I'm sorry its not like Imagination Tech wasn't firmly on apple's radar. They didn't put an advert in the UK Job Centres saying "software and microchip experts required" they poached their staff.

Staff being the most important part of any business.

It definitley makes it worse that Apple were a shareholder and had negotiations to buy.

I also think there should have been a clause in the Licensing agreement with Apple saying "if you poach our staff you pay x10 previous years royalties".
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/05/04/imagination-dispute-apple-licensing-rights/

 

[apolloa]

The pound dropped from more than 1.6 dollars to less than 1.3, so 25% doesn't seem outrageous (especially since they can't change their prices daily)

And the U.K. had representation in the EU. The American colonies had none in England. Big difference.

So now you get to live with your vote. Have fun with that.

A VERY clear example that you do not know about the EU and how it works.

 

[timber]

Apple killed them on purpose, the EU need to fine them.

Well, the UE is not that fast and 2019 is around the corner so in the end this won't be a problem relating a UE country.

 

[simonmet]

 

[dugbug]

Actually you are not quite correct.
Apple has been licensing the technology.
If Apple has developed a clean room version of a GPU that doesn't violate patents they'll need to prove they are stealing.
I can't imagine Apple being able to not violate AMD, nVidia and IT with a new GPU architecture.
[doublepost=1499249186][/doublepost]

Because they have been making chips with the IT GPU on them.
Apple will need to open the "kimono" so to speak since they were privy to IT intellectual property.
They will need to prove a clean room approach. None of the engineers that worked on anything related to IT will be able to work on the new GPU.

Unless any of you have designed chips and IP, you don't get it.
It's not like swapping an Intel CPU for AMD.

Apple built a gpu chip design center in orlando back in 2013 (I think it was 2013), they have been staffing GPU folks for a while now, not just from IT. This was telegraphed for many years, IT knew it was coming.

I would guess based on WWDC their approach is something more integral wrt machine learning offloading from the ARM. There is a lot they can do with full vertical integration

 

[Moccasin]

There's possibly a slightly nuanced take on Apple's position. They may know that some of Imagination's IP could be infringed by their own work but don't want to give competitors any clue as to where they're heading with their development, particularly in the AR/VR field. In releasing ARKit, Apple have gained a fair bit of initiative and their silence on chip design will be helpful in keeping competitors on their toes and (they hope) at a disadvantage. Apple have a couple of years or more before this even ends up in court (if they ever do), by which time the tech they're developing themselves will be in devices and the patenting of that may settle any IP issues.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. Hopefully Imagination survive somehow (and not just as a patent troll) but as others have said, they became complacent in assuming that Apple would always need them and not diversifying.

 

[The Cappy]

Imagination insists that Apple is making "unsubstantiated assertions," as the iPhone maker has supposedly yet to present any evidence to prove that it will no longer require the British firm's technology, at least not without violating its patents, intellectual property, and confidential information.
​

That's not how it works. If Imagination thinks Apple is infringing its IP, then it has to prove it. Apple doesn't have to prove the reverse.

You're missing the point. Apple hasn't revealed said technology. They've simply made an assertion which in turn devastated Imagination. Imagination thinks it's likely that Apple will be correct, but there's no way for them to check. And in the meantime, they suffer the consequences of what were, to be honest, unsubstantiated assertions. Maybe Apple will be right, maybe they'll be wrong. But if I were Imagination, I'd be unhappy too.

 

[citysnaps]

Excellent decision ?

Apple took thier top employees, it's actually a below the belt sucker as apple did not have to buy them out.

It's how a big player screws over the little guy. Apple realised they could just get the
Knowledge via hiring imaginations employees.

Imagination learned a very good lesson in how to structure employees contracts.

Aw... That is so adorable!

Imagination Tech has been on the ropes financially for several years due to not being a well-run company and eventually starts letting employees go more than a year ago in an attempt to recover. Apple hires skilled employees who have been let go, and others who want to leave for better opportunities and not wanting to go down in a sinking ship.

Again, good on Apple for seeing the handwriting on the wall, developing their own tech in-house, and not being beholden to a failed company for tech critical to Apple's success. And a win-win for those who left IT wanting a better future, and for Apple offering jobs to those who wanted to leave. Smart move, and yes, an excellent decision.

 

[iShater]

Guess the EU should also fine them for killing PowerPC, NuBus, FireWire and Classic OS...

Wait wait! FireWire is dead?

 

[cmaier]

You're missing the point. Apple hasn't revealed said technology. They've simply made an assertion which in turn devastated Imagination. Imagination thinks it's likely that Apple will be correct, but there's no way for them to check. And in the meantime, they suffer the consequences of what were, to be honest, unsubstantiated assertions. Maybe Apple will be right, maybe they'll be wrong. But if I were Imagination, I'd be unhappy too.

Apple has said nothing other than "we aren't going to use imagination and we don't want a license." The ones making the extraordinary claims are imagination. They claim it is impossible to create a gpu without their technology. The ones who have to provide proof are the ones making the extraordinary claims.

"Bigfoot is in my house."
"No he isn't"
"Oh yeah - prove it! Show me the proof!"

And by the way, apple is under no obligation to EVER "reveal" its technology to imagination or anyone else, absent a contract which says so or a court order which makes them to it.
[doublepost=1499261439][/doublepost]

A VERY clear example that you do not know about the EU and how it works.

That's what you write when nothing I said is actually incorrect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lis...an_Parliament_for_the_United_Kingdom,_2009–14
[doublepost=1499261550][/doublepost]

I also think there should have been a clause in the Licensing agreement with Apple saying "if you poach our staff you pay x10 previous years royalties".
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/05/04/imagination-dispute-apple-licensing-rights/

Anti-poaching agreements are unenforceable and illegal in many jurisdictions, because people have a right to work where they'd like, and such agreements artificially drive down salaries.
[doublepost=1499261725][/doublepost]

Actually you are not quite correct.
Apple has been licensing the technology.
If Apple has developed a clean room version of a GPU that doesn't violate patents they'll need to prove they are stealing.
I can't imagine Apple being able to not violate AMD, nVidia and IT with a new GPU architecture.
[doublepost=1499249186][/doublepost]



Unless any of you have designed chips and IP, you don't get it.
It's not like swapping an Intel CPU for AMD.

1) I was a CPU designer at AMD for 10 years, as well as at two other companies. I get it better than you.
2) no, apple doesn't have to "prove" anything. The burden of proof is on the party alleging infringement of IP.
3) for all you know Apple has licenses with NVIDIA, AMD, or others and can use their technologies with impunity.

 

[Tech198]

And this is all on the condition Imagination "knows" in advance its Apple's biggest competitor with VR, that "automatically" assumes by developing in-house Apple will still use their technologists without paying, just because their are issues with other companies supping other non-VR issues?

Did they even not think there could be a change? Being half of the profit coming from Apple, its understandable a company will say all they have to say to get them to stay.. But assuming that just because Apple doesn't want to be in it assumes your gonna grab their stuff anyway because of solid past?

Besides,, how can you prove you *don't* need them ? And why should Apple have to prove? They are free to go where they want.. regardless of how much big a profit someone makes... It may be a loss for Imagination, but being Apple's decision... the rest is almost like "getting on your hands and knees, clutching both hands and pleading for bloody mercy".

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

"Alright, we're Imagination Technologies, and we need a logo that conveys imagination. What are you thinking of doing?"

"How 'bout a circle next to a square?"

"OHMYGODYES"

What's the point with this? Here's a variation...

"Alright, we're Apple Inc., and we need a logo that conveys computers and phones and tablets and innovation. What are you thinking of doing?"

"How 'bout a single piece of fruit?"

"How 'bout a piece of used fruit?"

"How do we illustrate used fruit?"

"A piece of fruit with a bite out of it."

"A bite or a byte?"

Nerd eyes roll.

"Which fruit?"

"An apple... an apple with a bite out of it."

"Don't the Beatles already run a company called Apple using an apple for their logo?"

"Yes, but that's Apple Ltd. We'll be Apple Inc. making our name entirely different from theirs. And our apple logo will have a bite out of it, making our apple logo completely different from their apple."

"Their logo is a photo-realistic Apple. So let's make ours "thinner" by making it flat."

"Love thinner! Must always be thinner. And made of alumin-i-um if possible."

"Won't people still say we copied their logo and company name?"

"Some might... but our faithful will hammer them as trolls and, in time, rewrite history such that they'll imply the Beatles stole the apple name & logo from us."

"But everybody knows the Beatles came well before our company."

"Does actual history really matter? Our faithful will spin anything to prop us up. Best of all, they work so hard for us for free. If there's any doubts about that, why doesn't the executive team re-record the Beatle's albums and we'll courageously claim them as original works of our own too?"

Eddy: "dibs on Billy Shears... ahem, I mean Willy Cheers"
Schiller: "dibs on the Walrus... ahem, I mean the Seal"
Angela: "dibs on Lucy in the Sky... ahem, Judy in Disguise... ahem, Lacy making Fries"

"OHMYGODYES"

"Can't innovate my *ss"

 

[AngerDanger]

What's the point with this? Here's a variation...

The point was to make a joke about a company with a logo that doesn't fit their name. You then quoted me and made a joke about a company with a logo that perfectly fits its name (but not its products).

Yours would be a variation of mine if mine were a bit more like:

"Alright, we're Imagination Technologies, and we need a logo that conveys the notion of chip production. What were you thinking?"

"Circle next to a square—wouldn't want to run the risk of people actually thinking or logo fits our name or our line of business!"

"OHMYGODYES"

"I feel like this 'joke' should have more dialog."

"Too bad. I don't know any trivia about The Beatles."

 

[apolloa]

That's what you write when nothing I said is actually incorrect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lis...an_Parliament_for_the_United_Kingdom,_2009–14

No, quoting a Wikipedia page does not mean you know what your taking about . Theirs a lot more to it then that.

 

[CWallace]

Wait wait! FireWire is dead?

Pretty much. A solid article about it here.

 

[cmaier]

No, quoting a Wikipedia page does not mean you know what your taking about. Theirs a lot more to it then that.

I said that the U.K. is represented in the EU. You said I am wrong. You have yet to explain why. Merely repeating that I don't know what I'm talking about is evidence that i am right.
[doublepost=1499266865][/doublepost]

Yes, because we so need a lesson in "voting like a collection of xenophobic loonies" from America. Looked in the mirror lately?
[doublepost=1499244147][/doublepost]
So effectively you are saying that these employees are not capable of thinking up anything new. They're one trick pony's and have spent their brains at Imagination. Rather depressing world where once you've worked somewhere for a few years you are effectively a slave to that company because you couldn't possibly do a similar job anywhere else without violating patents.

Americans have to live with the result of our election. just like the U.K. does. And whining that Apple raised its prices because of brexit is nothing more than whining - everyone said the pound would plummet if brexit won. And it did. And higher prices on imports is the completely predictable consequence.

 

[sfwalter]

Why doesn't Apple just buy them? Wouldn't it save legal headaches that are most likely to come?