Modular power supplies are a hit among users, and personally, I like them much more than non-modular cabling. Usually, I work with 850+ watt power supplies and the cabling of non-moddable PSUs can easily be mistaken for a metallic creature from the sea. There are many manufacturers of modular power supplies on the market, but Ultra Products claims it is only one with the patent to cover these PSUs, or at least one part of it.

One of our readers pointed us to a post on OverclockersClub as well as Justia.com, which states that Ultra Products has filed suit against PSU manufacturers, including Antec, Channel Well Technology (+US subsidiary), Corsair Memory, Enhance Electronics, E-Power Technology/PCMCIS, FSP Group USA, Koolance USA, Mushkin, OCZ Technology, Sea Sonic Electronics, Silverstone Technology, SPI Electronic, Spire-Bytecom Fanner Corporation, Tagan Technology (+US subsidiary), Thermaltake Technology (+US subsidiary), Topower Computer Industrial (+US subsidiary) and Zalman (+US subsidiary).

There are no details about this suit available at this time, but we will keep our eyes on it. Oddly enough, we noticed that some well-known manufacturers often used by Advanced Micro Devices, Intel and Nvidia are not included in the suit. But bear in mind that list above includes manufacturers that represent multiple brands out there. Even companies that are not directly included on the list could be sued at a later date.

What makes this case strange is the fact that an affected patent number has not been publicly disclosed.

We contacted several companies listed in the suit, but were unable to get statements we actually could publish. We talked to the president of one of the affected PSU companies, who asked us not to mentions his name and not to publish his comments, but we can say that he was not really happy about the suit.

PACER

Apr 09, 2008 21:53     

The complaint and its attachments are available on PACER at 8 cents pp. I'd be happy to forward you my copy for free. The relevant patent is 7,133,293 - simple infringement.
B report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Ultra products stink

Apr 09, 2008 21:57     

No wonder they must attempt to make money by legal means rather than making a good product.
Narg report abuse vote down vote up Votes: -1

Doesn't Surprise Me

Apr 09, 2008 23:00     

As a former employee of TigerDirect, one of the largest retailers of Ultra products, I'm actually very surprised at the length of time it took Ultra to get around to this. They were the first modular PSU on the market, and it seemed like almost immediately there were other brands out there that were of lower quality because they had different connections that weren't as reliable. Ultra did the right thing and made separate connections for the Molex, SLi, and ATX connections instead of repeating the same connector on the PSU side and wiring it as needed on the hardware side. I hope Ultra comes out ahead with this.

Guest report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +2

going to get thrown out faster than tigerdirect went out of business

Apr 10, 2008 08:59     

The only way this has any merit is if these manufacturers copied Ultra's process exactly. Sounds like a desperation move on their part because they can't keep up with the higher-quality PSUs.
tgf report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Hey "tgf", you don't know what you're talking about

Apr 10, 2008 09:52     

Tigerdirect is still very much in business and has been for more than 20 years. It's also consistently ranked among the top and rated among the best merchants on the internet. As far as Ultra's patent lawsuit, it's not the "process" that was patented. The process doesn't matter. Only the certain technology that was granted a patent, no matter how big or small, detailed or vague. If even one other company infringed, Ultra has a right to protect its patent. Whether any of these companies did is for a court to decide, not fanboys on blogs.

wyrdtoo report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Very Specific Patent

Apr 10, 2008 13:49     

I found the details of the patent here: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...7,133,293 It seems to be written very specifically, so I think that maybe that's why Ultra hasn't included all of the other PSU makers in their claim. I'm not a lawyer, so I am not one to interpret the patent, but it seems that in order to infringe on the patent, the PSU has to be modular AND have UV reactive parts. What bugs me, is that this patent (like most others) took years to issue. It was filed in 2003 and issued November 2006. Now what I wonder is if the other PSU companies were approached by Ultra for licensing of the patent, or if they just chose to file a lawsuit 1.5 years later?

EEngineer report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0