Apple Ordered to Pay University of Wisconsin $234 Million in A7/A8 Patent Lawsuit - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Ordered to Pay University of Wisconsin $234 Million in A7/A8 Patent Lawsuit

ipad_iphone_ios_8Apple has been ordered to pay the University of Wisconsin's intellectual property management arm $234 million in damages for infringing on one of its processor patents, reports Reuters.

Earlier this week, a jury ruled Apple had infringed on a patent owned by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) when it used patented technology in its A7, A8, and A8X processors included in the 2013 and 2014 iPhone and iPad lineup.

WARF had originally asked for damages as high as $862 million, but later lowered that request to around $400 million. Apple will be paying a little more than half of the requested amount with the $234 million award WARF received from the jury. The presiding judge ruled Apple had not willfully infringed on WARF's patent, so the damages award will stay at $234 million.

The patent in question, titled "Table based data speculation circuit for parallel processing computer," was originally granted in 1998 and covers a method for improving processor efficiency. It lists several current and former University of Wisconsin researchers as inventors.

The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation has also filed a second lawsuit against Apple for the same patent, accusing the company of using the technology in the A9 and A9X chips found in the iPhone 6s, 6s Plus, and iPad Pro.

For the first six months of 2015, Apple averaged a daily net profit of $134.7 million, which means the judgment will account for approximately 42 hours of profit. Apple has said it will appeal the ruling.

Popular Stories

macworld iphone 18 pro colors

iPhone 18 Pro's Four Rumored Colors Revealed, Including 'Dark Cherry'

Friday April 17, 2026 3:50 am PDT by
A source said to be familiar with Apple's supply chain today revealed the color options Apple is planning for the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, and the upcoming foldable iPhone. Image via Macworld. The information comes from Macworld, which says the signature new color for this year's Pro models will be Dark Cherry, a deep wine-like red. While other sources had previously reported on a...
ipad mini 7 feature red and blue

OLED iPad Mini: Release Date, Pricing, and What to Expect

Wednesday April 15, 2026 8:15 am PDT by
According to the latest rumors, Apple is close to launching its next-generation iPad mini. So what should we expect from the successor to the iPad mini 7 that Apple released over a year ago? Read on to find out. Processor and Performance Apple is working on a next-generation version of the iPad mini (codename J510/J511) that features the A19 Pro chip, according to information found in code...
Apple Event Logo

Apple to Unveil All-New Product Category Later This Year

Thursday April 16, 2026 7:21 am PDT by
Apple is aiming to enter a new product category by unveiling its first pair of smart glasses in late 2026 or early 2027, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In any case, he expects the glasses to be released at some point next year. Like the Meta Ray-Bans, Gurman said Apple's glasses will have built-in cameras that let users capture photos and videos. He also expects the glasses to have...

Top Rated Comments

137 months ago
Hopefully the University of Wisconsin accepts Apple Pay. :)


- Joe
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kas23 Avatar
137 months ago
This thread still needs the obligatory; University of Wisconsin = patent trolls.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
HiRez Avatar
137 months ago
Let me look under this couch cushion...oh yeah, here you go.
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kdarling Avatar
137 months ago
If it is true that Apple was not aware of the patent, this illustrates the big issue with the current laws. The law is meant to protect ideas from being stolen, but if the idea is independently arrived at, it shows that the idea was not novel to begin with.
In this case though, Apple was fully aware of the patent, because they referenced it in (ummm... let's see... searching the USPTO database ('http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&f=S&l=50&d=PALL&RS=REF%2F5781752&Refine=Refine+Search&Query=ref%2F5781752+and+an%2Fapple')... ) wow at least 34 of their own patents.

The earliest cite I've seen so far is from 2007, so Apple knew about it long before the A7 was first used in 2013.

Bet the school itself sees NOTHING of this money.
That's a really bad bet. WARF was set up in 1925 specifically as a non-profit R&D organization that plows its patent revenues back into more research and into general grants to the university.

How does a publicly funded university hold a patent and it not be apart of the public domain?
WARF is separate from the university and funded by its own patents and projects.

whats the point of having a patient but not actively using it or licensing it?
WARF had been licensing this patent for years. Heck, their charter is to do research and license it.

According to their lawsuit, they approached Apple about licensing, Apple responded that they don't accept outside license offers and refused to negotiate, so WARF felt they had no other choice but to sue.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
busyscott Avatar
137 months ago
Ya, but you still have to live in Wisconsin so...
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
137 months ago
If it is true that Apple was not aware of the patent, this illustrates the big issue with the current laws. The law is meant to protect ideas from being stolen, but if the idea is independently arrived at, it shows that the idea was not novel to begin with.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)