Hi , Angela.
This is LW Foo, I also do not want to catch by the patent right while using
the lead free SnAgCu composition, I would very appreciated if you can tell
me who are the licensing vendor that currently supplied. Currently I am
getting the SnAgCu leadfree solder spheres from Alphametal (Cookson group)
is that a licensing vendor? pls advise further...
Thanks & Regards
L.W.Foo
Engineer - Advanced Technology
Foo Loke Whong
Carsem Semiconductor Sdn Bhd
Email id : [log in to unmask]
Phone : +(6 05) 5262333 Ext : 530
Fax : +(6 05) 5265333
> ----------
> From: Angela Grusd[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: Leadfree Electronics Assembly E-Mail
> Forum.;[log in to unmask]
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 5:17 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
>
> David,
> That's okay. I think you bring up a good point actually. And maybe going
> over the alloy history is something worthwhile. To be honest, I don't
> like to be caught up in these patent skirmishes that have come up over and
> over...for the past maybe 5 years. It got real old real fast and seemed
> to be a waste of my time. As a researcher, I was better off gathering
> data on the alloy.
>
> But so here it is. I was working with Dr. Notis at Lehigh and also taking
> his graduate Phase Equilibria course Mat 495. Dr. Notis and I were
> studying the Sn-Ag-Bi phase diagrams outside of class because that was my
> initial area of lead free research and alloy development. In class, each
> student had to select a unique ternary alloy system and present it to the
> class and well as write a paper for the final. I could have chosen the
> Sn-Ag-Bi but I saw it as an opportunity to learn something new so I picked
> Sn-Ag-Cu. I did a literature search and found the Petzow paper and also
> the Ames paper. I was more interested in Petzow's work because wow here
> was this wonderful quasi binary eutectic that had not been further
> evaluated. I thought it was the perfect choice for alloy development as
> did Dr. Notis and my boss, the Technical Director at Heraeus. So I
> presented the Sn-Ag-Cu ternary system to the class including
> microstructures and DSC curves and got an A. You know, it's unfortunate
> that we get so caught up in things like patent issues that it becomes hard
> for us to believe that a company could just develop an alloy because
> scientifically it made sense. I make that as a general observation and
> nothing personal.
>
> Regarding you copper question: good question. I would think it might
> revert to the solubility limit of Cu in that alloy. It might be 0.7%Cu
> but again I would refer to the phase diagram and do some experiments. The
> alloy should pick up some copper based on my experiments with copper wires
> but I didn't analyze the final composition because that was not my goal
> for that particular experiment. Compositional analysis of the solder
> joints on the PCB's that were built with that alloy would be needed. The
> surface finish on the board might make a difference--immersion silver
> versus Entek, for example. And you would have to take into account the
> compositional variations--whether or not the new alloy was homogenous.
> And then there is the lead finish material to take into account. Without
> as much copper in the joining materials, you definitely would reduce the
> amount of copper that the alloy could pick up. That would be a good area
> to research and the patent question may warrant that type of research.
> Have a good weekend!
> Angela
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Suraski [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 1:38 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
>
>
> Angela,
>
> Couldn't copper pick-up after soldering put it in range?
>
> I in no way tried to offend you. Clearly it's an excellent alloy. That
> comment was an afterthought and, to be honest, a common misperception in
> the industry. I had no idea that you designed the alloy. I'm glad you
> responded to clear up the air and I apologize for offending you.
>
> David
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask] ; [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 3:27 PM
> Subject: RE: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
>
>
> Two more points
> 1. It is relevant to patent attorneys that the Cu% is OUTSIDE the
> patented range.
> 2. The alloy Sn/4Ag/0.5Cu was designed by myself at Heraeus and was
> in no way "designed to circumvent any patent" thank you very much! The
> alloy was designed with that composition because it is the reported quasi
> binary eutectic if you look at the phase diagram that was developed in the
> 1950's by Petzow. As a researcher, phase diagrams are invariably referred
> to in alloy design. The alloy was designed with that composition because
> all material scientists are taught that the eutectic composition will
> result in the most favorable properties. Data gathered on the alloy in
> bulk and solder paste form indicate that it does indeed have good
> properties.
> Angela
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Suraski [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 12:55 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
>
>
> Thanks for the replies. Two points:
>
> 1. Even if the alloy has been determined to be "free and clear"
> by several patent attorneys, this has not occurred in a court of law. As
> of now the patent still holds and is legally binding.
> 2. This patent has both alloy composition and application
> coverage. In other words, if prior art can be proven it may be possible
> to beat the alloy composition section of the patent; however, it will also
> be necessary to challenge the application side that claims a unique use
> for soldering electronics assemblies. From what I understand, this section
> of the Ames Lab/Iowa State patent (# US05527628) is probably enforceable
> and could potentially result in patent infringement. Basically, this
> means that even if a manufacturer is using an alloy designed to circumvent
> the patent (such as Sn/Ag4/Cu0.5), if during manufacturing the alloy
> "picks up" base metals (normally copper) and forms an intermetallic that
> contains the elements covered under a patent, the manufacturer has
> violated that patent and may be subject to legal action. This section of
> the patent seems far less challengeable.
>
> I would be curious to hear IPC's position on this issue, as well as
> that of the holder(s) of this patent.
> David
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Angela Grusd" < [log in to unmask]>
> To: < [log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 2:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
>
>
> > But keep in mind that the Sn/4Ag/0.5 Cu alloy has been determined
> to be
> > "free and clear" by several patent attorneys based on the prior
> art in the
> > 1950's as well as physically being outside the Ames patent. This
> is a fact.
> > The most intelligent thing to do would be to have your attorney
> look at the
> > patents as well as their patent history that is available and look
> at the
> > prior art (Gunter Petzow) and make the decision from that
> standpoint.
> > Angela
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Charles Dolci [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 11:44 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
> >
> >
> > Like most news articles it doesn't say a heck of a lot. All one
> can glean
> > from
> > this article is that the two parties fighting over patent rights
> have
> > resolved
> > their differences. Nothing in the article says that the patent
> holders will
> > actually start licensing the technology to anyone. And, of course,
> it
> > doesn't
> > say what the royalties will be if they do start licensing the
> technology. So
> > in
> > addition to increased materials costs (I assume silver and copper
> are more
> > expensive than lead) solder makers will have to pay a royalty to
> the patent
> > holders (unless Senju Metal and Matsushita Electric decide to be
> altruistic
> > and
> > not charge a royalty)
> > Note also that the article says "The move makes it possible for
> __Japanese
> > equipment manufacturers__ to purchase Sn-Ag-Cu solder from Senju
> Metal,
> > Nihon
> > Superior or any vendors licensed by both companies..." It says
> nothing about
> > non-Japanese OEM's or the licenses from the US patent holders
> (although that
> > may
> > be because the article originated in Japan and was aimed at a
> Japanese
> > audience??).
> >
> > Nor does it say what rights the US patent holders obtained from
> the Japanese
> > patent holders. However, I suspect that cross license agreements
> were
> > negotiated
> > since that is the common way these disputes are resolved so that
> the US
> > patent
> > holders can license whatever they got from the Japanese patents.
> >
> > On the issue of sublicensing - that is not likely to be relevant
> to OEMs. If
> > Senju Metal grants a license to ABC Solder Co. Ltd. anyone who
> buys solder
> > from
> > ABC Solder will be deemed to have a "license" and will not need to
> get
> > seperate
> > licences from Senju; otherwise the license from Senju to ABC would
> be
> > meaningless.
> > I don't know what the rules are in Japan, so the Japanese patent
> rights
> > holders
> > may be able to discriminate against certain solder makers in
> granting or
> > withholding licenses. In the US, even though a patent is a stae
> granted
> > monopoly, if a holder of a patent does decide to license the
> technology it
> > can
> > not do so in a way the restricts competition (i.e. its licensing
> practices
> > can
> > not violate the US anti-trust laws). In other words they can not
> use the
> > state
> > granted monopoly in a monopolistc way. [Don't worry, it makes no
> sense to me
> > either]
> > As an aside, since both US patent holders are taxpayer funded
> institutions
> > there
> > may be certain rules that apply to how they can exploit their
> patent rights.
> > I
> > will make some enquiries among my Intellectual Property
> colleagues.
> >
> > Chuck Dolci
> > Director, Environment, Health & Safety
> >
> > *MIME-Version: 1.0
> > *X-Priority: 3
> > *X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> > *X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
> > *From: David Suraski < [log in to unmask]>
> > *Subject: [LF] Sn-Ag-Cu Patent
> > *To: [log in to unmask]
> > *
> > *Hi All,
> > *
> > *I found the press release below while on IPC's leadfree site.
> Could
> > *someone please explain what this means? Has the patent been
> opened up
> > *or do manufacturers in Japan now need to sub-license the alloy?
> > *
> > *Does this do anything to resolve the potential patent issues
> surrounding
> > *the use of a Sn-Ag-Cu alloy in the U.S. or importing these
> assemblies
> > *into the U.S.(except for from Japan)?
> > *
> > *Thanks,
> > *
> > *David
> > *
> > *Pb-Free Solder Patent Problems Finally Resolved
> > *
> > *Senju Metal Industry Co, Ltd, and Nihon Superior Co, Ltd, have
> resolved
> > *their patent dispute concerning Sn-Ag-Cu-based Pb-free solder.
> Rights
> > *held by Senju Metal and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co, Ltd,
> and
> > *other rights held by Nihon Superior and the US Department of
> Energy's
> > *Ames Laboratory at Ohio State University, have been unified into
> a set
> > *for licensing to other solder manufacturers.
> > *
> > *The move makes it possible for Japanese equipment manufacturers
> to
> > *purchase Sn-Ag-Cu solder from Senju Metal, Nihon Superior or any
> vendors
> > *licensed by both companies, and to sell equipment products in
> both Japan
> > *and America without fears of infringement.
> > *
> > *The problem stemmed from the fact that Senju Metal and Matsushita
> > *Electric were granted the patent in Japan, while the Ames
> Laboratory
> > *held patent rights in the US, meaning that neither side could
> sell in
> > *the other country.
> > *
> > *Sn-Ag-Cu solder is the most promising Pb-free solder, and the
> decision
> > *to unify rights is expected to accelerate its adoption by
> manufacturers
> > *as the "standard" lead-free material.
> > *
> > *(April 2001 Issue, Nikkei Electronics Asia)
> > *
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -----
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
> 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
> text in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send:
> SET
> > Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources &
> Databases >
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site ( http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
> additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> 847-509-9700
> > ext.5315
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -----
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
> 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
> text in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send:
> SET Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources &
> Databases > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site ( http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
> additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
