Alphabet’s Google is currently defending itself in a high-stakes federal jury trial in Boston against claims by computer scientist Joseph Bates and his company, Singular Computing. The lawsuit seeks $1.67 billion in damages, alleging patent infringement related to processors powering artificial intelligence (AI) technology in Google products.
Bates, a Massachusetts-based computer scientist, asserts that Google copied his patented technology crucial for AI development. He claims that, after multiple meetings between 2010 and 2014, where he shared innovative ideas with Google, the tech giant integrated his technology without proper licensing. The alleged infringement involves the incorporation of Bates’ innovations into Google’s Tensor Processing Units, utilized in various AI features across Google services.
Singular Computing contends that Google chose to replicate Bates’ technology without his knowledge, emphasizing a lack of respect for intellectual property. Internal emails presented in court reveal Google’s acknowledgment of the suitability of Bates’ ideas for their AI endeavors.
In response, Google’s defense argues that the employees responsible for designing the chips had never met Bates, asserting that the chip designs were independent of his contributions. Google characterizes Bates as a «disappointed inventor,» highlighting his struggles to persuade other companies to adopt his technology.
Google’s legal team also questions the effectiveness of Bates’ technology, claiming it employs approximate math that can generate «incorrect» calculations. They argue that Google’s chips are fundamentally different from what is described in Singular’s patents.
Before the trial, Singular initially sought up to $7 billion in damages. However, during the proceedings, they adjusted their claim to $1.67 billion. This trial coincides with arguments in a separate case before a U.S. appeals court in Washington, where the validity of Singular’s patents is being contested.
Google introduced its Tensor Processing Units in 2016, powering various AI functions. Singular claims that versions 2 and 3 of these units, introduced in 2017 and 2018, infringe upon its patent rights. The outcome of this trial and the parallel patent dispute could have far-reaching implications for the AI technology landscape. Stay tuned for updates on this landmark case.
