Lol Kevin zhang oversaw 10nm sram test chip failure at AD for A and B steppings and he is not involved in process
TSMC formally sues ex-SVP over alleged transfer of secrets to Intel
- Thread starter Daniel Nenni
- Start date
There are different types of "involved". I would imagine that analysis of SRAM failures requires rather significant understanding of the process.
Last edited:
I said Intel's employeeS who joined TSM. Another ex Intel's employee highlighted in the past few days:
Also, even SemiAccurate was able to gether info on Intel's progress at that time. I would imagine insiders would provide greater details than SemiAccurate.
Hopefully this drama and unnecessary distraction for both companies gets settled and put away quickly. TW and US are allies and need to unite thier forces in fighting the evil force that is the CCP.
During this time of Thanksgiving, both companies need to give some thanks to each other. Intel should thank TSMC for providing cost effective leading edge processes for some of its key products and consequently enabling Intel's continued survival in this fast moving competitive industry. TSMC should thank Intel for its success because many of its senior technical executives learned and accumulated their knowledge and experience and refined their craft while working as engineering managers in Intel fabs !! Have some appreciation for gods sake! TSMC won't be TSMC without those enormous former-Intel contributors!
During this time of Thanksgiving, both companies need to give some thanks to each other. Intel should thank TSMC for providing cost effective leading edge processes for some of its key products and consequently enabling Intel's continued survival in this fast moving competitive industry. TSMC should thank Intel for its success because many of its senior technical executives learned and accumulated their knowledge and experience and refined their craft while working as engineering managers in Intel fabs !! Have some appreciation for gods sake! TSMC won't be TSMC without those enormous former-Intel contributors!
Of course, there are some restrictions such as confidentiality and NDAs, but interfering with professional freedom is not justified.Based on the following report, he is not happy with TSM's management:
下個是誰？羅唯仁「帶槍投英特爾」 爆魏哲家陷更大人事危機 - 財經
台積電日前爆出重量級人事震撼彈，退休資深副總羅唯仁遭指控在離職前影印二十箱資料，並轉投美國英特爾，引發科技圈譁然；台積電已於11月25日提告羅唯仁。有消息指出，這已讓董座魏哲家面臨一場關於人事布局的思考，www.chinatimes.com
Should we also consider it a betrayal when people changed jobs from Intel to TSM at a time when TSM was in a weaker position? And why would that be considered a betrayal, given that he had worked at Intel for 18 years before joining TSM? I don’t understand the double-standard argument.
MKWVentures
Moderator
When I worked in development, I was required to take work notes in a formal notebook and company policy was that it was Confidential material and IP. It is not a top secret document but it is confidential and company property. It is fairly common policy that notes made while employed at a company are company IP. Every company I worked for had this as a policy. Notes from work are not personal when you are getting paid to do R&D.
MKWVentures
Moderator
this issue is not knowledge. that cannot be controlled. It is taking company confidential material. Most people I know do not do this.
I think it is equally likely that WJL also brought his personal notes to TSM after leaving Intel given this is his way of organising knowledge based on the news reporting:
No, I don't think there's any need to force it to be made public.
However, he may just be directly under LBT and not be in a higher position.
They may not be part of the management team, but may only be senior engineers.
During those years, TSMC and Intel were not direct competitors, since Intel did not have IFS and Intel also made its own processors (no chiplets then). From 7nm onwards, they were closer to competing since AMD became a TSMC customer, but by then, Intel and TSMC were already on different paths. Now, with IFS, Intel is trying to get on the same path as TSMC; it's an actual competitor, so the foundry-related information going back to Intel is more of a business threat to TSMC.
I think the argument should be based on actions/merits, not circumstances. We should apply a single standard, not double standards. Intel did attempt to enter the foundry business earlier on, but it wasn’t able to make it work.
Also, given that Intel was leading in process technology at the time, it is reasonable to assume that TSMC benefited more from Intel’s knowledge outflows than the other way around. Intel’s current technology stack is vastly different from TSMC’s. WJL had only been at Intel for a couple of months, so it is highly unlikely that Intel gained anything meaningful from his presence. Even TSMC has stated that it is highly unlikely for a single individual to have a significant impact on the process race.
Even if the plaintiff did not do such a thing, the media would mercilessly attack the defendant...