© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The Google brand is seen on the Google home at CES 2024, an annual shopper electronics commerce present, in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. January 10, 2024. REUTERS/Steve Marcus/File Picture
By Blake Brittain and Nate Raymond
(Reuters) -Google on Wednesday reached a settlement in a patent infringement lawsuit over chips that energy the corporate’s artificial-intelligence expertise, in accordance with a submitting in Massachusetts federal courtroom.
The settlement comes the identical day that closing arguments have been scheduled to start in a trial on Singular Computing’s lawsuit, which had sought $1.67 billion in damages for Google (NASDAQ:)’s alleged misuse of its computer-processing improvements.
Particulars of the settlement weren’t instantly accessible. Representatives for Google and Singular confirmed the settlement however didn’t present extra details about it.
Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda stated that the corporate didn’t violate Singular’s patent rights and that it was “happy to have resolved this matter.”
Singular, based by Massachusetts-based laptop scientist Joseph Bates, claimed that Google included his expertise into processing items that help AI options in Google Search, Gmail, Google Translate and different Google providers.
The 2019 lawsuit stated that Bates shared his innovations with the corporate between 2010 and 2014. It argued that Google’s Tensor Processing Items copied Bates’ expertise and infringed two patents.
Google launched the items in 2016 to energy AI used for speech recognition, content material technology, advert advice and different capabilities. Singular stated that variations 2 and three of the items, launched in 2017 and 2018, violated its patent rights.
Inner emails cited in the course of the trial’s opening statements on Jan. 9 confirmed that Google’s now-chief scientist, Jeff Dean, wrote to others about how Bates’ concepts could possibly be “very well suited” for what Google was creating.
Google countered that the staff who designed its chips by no means met Bates and created them independently. The corporate stated its expertise was “essentially totally different than what’s described in Singular’s patents.”
