Answer is simple, they didnt have so many, inherited from NXP who owns %60 percent of their shares after deal close up. They have good customer portfolio and eagered to be involved more, a nice movement yet still gappy. No production, no certainty for on time delivery as all founderies are in allocation where Trident lets their products beeing produced. Its crucial especially nowadays rapid changing market where everybody wants to have their own TV, or set-box
A very positive use of the IP. I hope other firms begin to emulate. The problem I have with patent is that nothing could replace the patent system. However, patent system has discouraged lots of innovations. When you are not allowed to incremental innovate on a product until the patent expires, it makes the world less innovative. I see a world with no patent and technology could flow better.
I am aware that Philips/NXP had licensed MEMC technology to a few other players in the industry before the Trident deal. Trident's string of acquisitions really does make it a powerhouse in digital video processing IP. I, for one, believe that they seem to be taking a very healthy attitude in how to handle their IP. In fact, I would say that it is very "UN-troll-like" in that they are making it clear that companies can either buy their products, or license their IP. But they have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize their profit from all that expensive IP.
Actually, I think Trident's Duane went a little too far by calling Rambus "patent troll." In defense of Rambus, the company has interest in marketing their patented invention.
That said, it isn't clear to me if Philips or Micronas over the last decade ever made any genunine efforts to license their patented motion estimation/motion compensation (MEMC) technologies to others.
I suspect that Trident is hot to trott to market their IPs now because MEMC has become increasingly important for the upcoming 3D TV (240MHz).
I for one applaud them for coming forward early and saying: "We are here and we are ready to license our IP" instead of waiting for many years and then going after the established chip-sets and market products. It will be fun to watch who signs up, who defers, and who tries to avoid the IP by using one of the alternative approaches. I do find the "patent troll" comment both funny and evocative. It seems that certain other companies' behaviors have been noticed; lets hope this upfront approach will frame future IP dealings.
So, Trident claims that the company is now in the business of marketing their patents. Who knew that Trident now has this many IPs in video processing area?! Should other consumer chip companies be worried about this?
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.