Dish Network has quietly waged a battle with Nvidia Corp. since April in an effort to stop the chipmaker from using the name "Hopper" for its next-generation graphic processing unit (GPU). 

Dish has since 2012 branded its digital video recorders and other satellite receiver equipment under the Hopper name. It's unclear why the Englewood, Co. telecom, which is transitioning into wireless connectivity as its legacy satellite TV business slowly fades away, is concerned about brand confusion when it comes to tech hardware used in things like gaming computers. 

Dish, however, filed a notice of opposition to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) last spring. Proceedings tied to that filing have been stopped on numerous occasions since, giving both sides 60 days to conduct settlement talks each time. 

The most recent stoppage occurred on Dec. 21 -- if Dish and Nvidia can't reach an agreement by Feb. 22, proceedings including pre-trial discovery, will reconvene. 

Nvidia filed with the USPTO in 2019 to use the name Hopper to describe the architecture its new GPUs. Products tied to this Hopper design are expected to hit the market this year. 

 As our sibling pub Tom's Hardware notes, the Nvidia brand name stems from the late Carol Hopper, who developed the programming language COBOL and invented the first compiler, among other achievements.

As Tom's Hardware also mentioned, Nvidia is developing other consumer-targeted GPUs under the codenames "Ada" and "Lovelace." 

The estates of late mathematician Ada Lovelace and pornography actress Linda Lovelace have yet to initiate any trademark opposition with the USPTO. 

On Monday San Jose, Calif. chip maker Nvidia agreed to a $40 billion purchase of UK-based tech design and IP company Arm Ltd from Japan’s SoftBank Group.

Experts are hailing the deal as the biggest ever in the chipmaking business, putting ARM—an IP company with chip designs that have been licensed by Intel, Qualcomm and Samsung, just to name a few globally situated chipmaking companies—into the hands of one U.S. specialty silicon supplier. 

Consider that most smart phones sold around the world use chips that carry Arm IP. 

“It’s a company with reach that’s just unlike any company in the history of technology,” Nvidia Chief CEO Jensen Huang told Bloomberg.

But never mind Nvidia's local competitors like Cisco. Already, Chinese tech makers are raising red flags, with company’s like Huawei already shut out from being chips from U.S. suppliers. 

Geoff Blaber, VP of research for the Americas with CCS Insights, told Reuters the deal “will rightly face huge opposition” from Arm’s customers.

“An acquisition by Nvidia would be detrimental to Arm and its ecosystem,” Blaber said. “Independence is critical to the ongoing success of Arm and once that is compromised, its value will start to erode.”

For its part, Nvidia is insisting that Arm will remain a neutral and open supplier of IP. 

Huang and Arm Chief Executive Simon Segars told Reuters that Nvidia will retain Arm’s United Kingdom headquarters , which exempt it from many U.S. export control laws. Arm will keep its open licensing model, they also said. 

Huang added that Nvidia will even license some of Nvidia’s designs—including its graphical processing unit (GPU) technology—through Arm’s network of silicon partners. That move would, in theory, help Nvidia’s competitors. 

Nvidia stock finished trading up 6% on the Nasdaq Monday. The company has a market capitalization of over $350 billion. And it makes devices like the Nvidia Shield, a popular Android TV connected TV box that has niche popularity in the video streaming business.

But data center silicon, which currently generates around $3 billion in annual revenue for Nvidia, is where the company wants to expand. It currently trails market leader Cisco. 

“We know for sure that data centers and clouds are clamoring for the Arm microprocessor, the Arm CPU,” Huang said in another interview with analyst Patrick Moorhead. 

“We're about to enter a phase where we're going to create an internet that is thousands of times bigger than the internet that we enjoy today,” Huang added. “A lot of people don't realize this,” Huang told Moorhead. “We would like to create a computing company for this age of AI.”

On Oct. 9, an International Trade Commission (ITC) administrative law judge made an initial determination in a patent infringement case between mobile technology companies. The ITC judge’s determination, albeit preliminary, was that the commission could find no evidence to support the claims made by the plaintiff, Nvidia, which owns patents for graphics processing technology. However the case will continue and the implications of a potential ruling could be pernicious for the Latino community in the United States.

Almost a year ago, Nvidia Corp. filed a claim at the ITC asserting that Samsung Electronics Co. and Qualcomm Inc. infringed on some of its patents related to specific chips in particular Samsung mobile devices. Nvidia asked the ITC, an independent government board, for an exclusion order that would apply to Samsung products, including tablets and smartphones that contain the disputed Qualcomm chip technology. 

An exclusion order would essentially bar these devices from entering the U.S. This order would reduce access to smartphones and other connected devices like tablets. Our concern is that this would have a disproportionate effect on the nation's Latino communities, which depend on affordable mobile technologies for Internet access more than other communities.

Nearly 72% of Hispanics own a smartphone – 20% higher than the national average – according to a Nielson report released last year. But that high level of ownership does not tell the full story about the unique relationship U.S. Latinos have with their smartphones, tablets and other devices. For many Latinos, these devices are the only way they access the Internet. 

A Pew Research Center study shows that at least 13% of Hispanics and 12% of African-Americans are “smartphone-dependent,” suggesting that they don’t have access to the Internet at home. There are many reasons for this, notably the availability of affordable broadband connections. Just the same, the so-called digital divide is narrowing. According to Pew’s research, 81% of Hispanics now use the Internet, compared with 85% of whites. And mobile technology is critical to closing this divide.

Presently, connecting to the Internet is not an option but a necessity. It is frequently the most efficient way to access a host of information in a timely manner, seek employment opportunities and stay current on news that affects you – no matter where you live, transcending income level and ethnicity. In the past year, 73% of Hispanics who own a smartphone have used their device to search for information related to a health condition, and 45% have used their phone to look up educational materials or access the rapidly increasing offering of online education programs.

One of the reasons why this exclusion order would be particularly disruptive is cost. According to Experian Marketing Services, 53% of Hispanic adults use an Android device, compared with only 34 percent that use an iPhone. Because Samsung manufactures 65 percent of all Android smartphones, an import ban on its many popular products would hit Hispanic smartphone users especially hard as the smartphone supply would be dramatically reduced. In addition, Pew’s study also noted Latinos are twice as likely as other groups to terminate their smartphone service because of increased costs.

Not so long ago the mobile Internet was novel new concept. Now it is a redundant term. The Internet is mobile. The dramatic increase in connectivity is allowing new businesses to grow with dynamic efficiency and is breaking down barriers for millions. This is a testament to free-market innovation and, for the most part, a light regulatory touch. Keeping an ample supply of a variety of affordable devices is a critical element of maintaining the momentum of today’s world. Therefore, this exclusion order affecting so many products could have dramatic unintended consequences, particularly among Hispanics.

Disputes over patents are common in a competitive technology economy, and companies should be free to contest each other over intellectual property rights and recover what is rightfully theirs. In Nvidia's dispute with Samsung and Qualcomm, however, let’s hope the initial determination sets the stage for the ITC to reject Nvidia’s request for an exclusion order when it reaches a final ruling, which is expected next year. An exclusion order in this case threatens to restrict Internet access for millions of consumers and an even larger proportion of Hispanics, who rely on affordable mobile technology to stay connected.

Allen Gutierrez serves as the National Executive Director of The Latino Coalition, a national organization that represents Latino interests with senior executives of many Fortune 500 companies and local and federal government agencies.

Timed with Google’s I/O developers conference this week, Nvidia has launched the Shield, a high-end gaming console/streaming device that’s equipped with the Android TV OS and the ability to stream 4K content from sources such as Netflix.

Though the device will support HBO Go, Watch ESPN and several other authenticated TV Everywhere apps that require a pay TV subscription, the Shield also provides access to services such as Sling TV, Dish’s new OTT-TV service, and will soon do the same for HBO Now, the standalone OTT service from HBO. Google’s Channels app supports live TV when the supporting device is paired to a separate tuner and digital over-the-air antenna.

Shield isn't cheap. Available outlets such as Amazon, Best Buy and Fry’s Electronics, the console starts at $199.99 (for the 16 GB version), while the Shield Pro (500 GB) fetches $299.99. Nvidia also sells Shield accessories such as an advanced, voice-enabled remote control ($49.99), extra gaming controllers ($59.99 each), and a vertical stand ($29.99).

Some of the initial reviewers on Nvidia’s new creation were mixed, noting that the Shield could have trouble gaining mass appeal. 

Engadget’s Chris Velazco called it “the most interesting Android TV box you’ll find out there right now,” adding that the set-up was “[d]ead simple.” The biggest sticking point was the requirement to buy extra hardware in order to take full advantage of the Shield’s capabilities.

Gizmodo’s Sean Hollister said the Shield is “the most powerful set-top box ever made,” noting its use of the Tegra X1 chip, enabling it to play high-end games such as Crysis. He also liked that the Shield has plenty of ports for external storage, elements lacking in the Nexus Player, the first Android TV-powered device. Having it double as a Chromecast is also a plus. “With a little extra help from Google and Android developers to make games playable on the TV, we might be able to have a viable Android game console in the living room,” Hollister wrote. The big downside: “Android TV still sucks. It looks almost identical to the TV operating system I panned six months ago!”

CNET’s David Katzmaier gave the Shield a rating of 6.9 (out of 10), acknowledging its “best-in-class hardware, high points for conversational voice search capability built right into the game controller and a “solid” selection of native apps. On the other end, it’s pricey and doesn’t have the kind of app selection of less expensive streaming platforms like the Roku, Apple TV and Amazon Fire TV. His bottom line: it’s the “most potent Android TV device yet” but other shortfalls and high price limit its appeal.