Printer Friendly

DAVIN COMPUTER CORP. EAGERLY AWAITS ITS DAY IN COURT IN ITS $250 MILLION LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM

 DAVIN COMPUTER CORP. EAGERLY AWAITS ITS DAY IN COURT
 IN ITS $250 MILLION LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM
 IRVINE, Calif., Jan. 29 /PRNewswire/ -- The following was released today by DAVIN Computer Corp.:
 Like David waiting for his battle with Goliath, David H. Methvin of Irvine, Calif., is looking forward to his courtroom battle against IBM (NYSE: IBM) of Armonk, N.Y., in his company's $250 million lawsuit against the 350,000-man computer giant.
 This new "David" is the president and chief executive officer of DAVIN Computer Corp., a small minicomputer firm with seven employees, who claims that during a year of dealing with IBM about an exclusive license to use DAVIN's patented and trade secret technology in IBM's desktop computers, IBM managed to effectively destroy DAVIN.
 The five specific charges of IBM misdeeds are misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract and unfair competition. DAVIN is asking for $50 million in damages on each of the charges plus punitive damages.
 Methvin, who was the founder of Computer Automation, Inc., prior to founding DAVIN, is known in the computer industry as a scrappy innovator who built his first computer company into a technology leader that holds several "firsts" in the industry. IBM licensed the rights to Computer Automation's first patent for use in its desktop computers, paying royalties to Computer Automation for a number of years.
 "DAVIN developed some exciting and important computer technology that can be used in most of the existing computer designs to provide a significant power boost; it's like taking four- or eight-cylinder engines that have been running with only one spark plug and adding the other spark plugs. The effect is dramatic and the cost is trivial," Methvin said.
 DAVIN approached IBM first, thinking IBM could make use of this technology -- called Parallel Byte Processing -- to help fight off the mainframe threat by the Japanese and others.
 "When they got excited about adding it to the desktops before the mainframes, we were initially surprised, but quickly saw the strategic brilliance of the idea," Methvin continued. "Unfortunately for us, IBM did not deal in good faith with us, and the year spent working with them on the technology and the subsequent year trying to get them to rectify the situation has been exceedingly costly to DAVIN."
 The suit involves DAVIN's development of Parallel Byte Processing (PBP), which enables otherwise conventional computer processors to do more work with each execution cycle. PBP lets a computer process four or eight bytes in parallel, rather than one at a time, as most computers today require.
 Parallel Byte Processing was developed over a period of years by DAVIN who designed a low-cost 64-bit minicomputer product line that uses PBP as a major source of power.
 "When DAVIN's computers are firing on all eight cylinders doing byte-crunching, it is amazing the power we get out of that engine," Methvin enthused. "Then when we realized that PBP could be added to older computer architectures, we knew we were really on to something."
 Apparently IBM agreed, because when DAVIN approached IBM about licensing PBP technology from DAVIN, IBM expressed great interest and began a project to incorporate PBP into the IBM desktop computers which were in need of some powerful features that would distinguish them from the clones, according to Methvin.
 "We disclosed confidential and trade secret information to IBM at their request over a period of many months, believing that they were dealing in good faith with us," Methvin said. "With encouragement from IBM, we refrained from dealing with IBM competitors so as not to alert the other firms to what would be coming to market in a year or so."
 When IBM finally disclosed that, contrary to their previous assurances, they did not have the manufacturing rights to the Intel processor 32-bit chips used in the desktop products other than the 386, Methvin realized that they had not been upfront with DAVIN from the beginning.
 "Their professed strategy was a non-starter; without the manufacturing rights to the 486/586 processors, it made no strategic sense to put PBP into the 386. DAVIN had wasted a year with IBM, given them trade secrets, and then we spent another year trying to get IBM to rectify the situation and avoid litigation," Methvin continued.
 DAVIN apparently has extensive patent claims on PBP technology. There is an on-going technical and legal analysis to determine the extent to which existing IBM products infringe these claims.
 "Right now we're pushing to get the existing case in front of a jury," Methvin said.
 Methvin's first company, Computer Automation, Inc., was known for its development of the Naked Mini line of minicomputers. It also had the distinction of being the first company to put a processor on a single card and later an entire computer on a single card. Computer Automation's first patent was licensed by IBM and used in the Micro Channel feature of the IBM desktop computers. DAVIN Computer went public in August 1990 and is traded on the "bulletin board" for small stocks.
 -0- 1/29/92
 /CONTACT: Vivian Hunter or David Methvin of DAVIN Computer Corp., 714-250-0414/
 (IBM) CO: DAVIN Computer Corp.; IBM ST: California IN: CPR SU:


KJ-AL -- LA014 -- 4817 01/29/92 14:32 EST
COPYRIGHT 1992 PR Newswire Association LLC
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1992 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:PR Newswire
Date:Jan 29, 1992
Words:872
Previous Article:NEW MEXICO JOINS FOUR OTHER STATES IN NAMING TELTECH TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY ACCESS SERVICES
Next Article:1992 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA FEATURES 200 HORSEPOWER V-6 STANDARD ENGINE
Topics:


Related Articles
COURT APPROVES AGREEMENT IN IBM VS. COMDISCO LITIGATION
COURT APPROVES AGREEMENT IN IBM VS. COMDISCO LITIGATION
CRAY COMPUTER DISCLOSES LAWSUIT
DATA GENERAL FILES PATENT INFRINGEMENT SUIT AGAINST IBM
SCO Says SGI Has Until October 14.
Asustek, IBM reach out-of-court settlement on patent infringement lawsuit.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2016 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters