Rambus Loses; Vows to Appeal 147
Fat Rat Bastard writes: "Fresh off of the C-NET new wire comes this news flash "A federal judge in Virginia on Friday threw out the three remaining patent infringement claims brought by memory chip designer Rambus in its case against European chipmaker Infineon." Rambus are vowing to appeal after the last three of 57 patent claims that survived the chop Tuesday were thrown out of court."
Credibility? (Score:2)
Simply put, the judge must believe the credibility of the witnesses. They may know all the high-tech terminology and there may well even be a valid case, but if the judge finds any inconsistencies, inaccuracies, lack of co-operation or disrespect for the court, he may disbelieve everything the witness may say. Once credibility is lost, it may never come back, at least for that judge.
Rambus appears to have done just about everything that it could to lose credibility. First there is the criticism by a judge that they were "judge shopping". Then there was the appearance that they had patents covering just about everything dating from the start of the computing era, if not it appeared that patents could be manufactured out of whole cloth on short notice. What other impression could be given by attending JEDEC where everybody laid out their proprietary technology on the table and then announcing, "oh, by the way, those are our patents". What incredible timing!!? Then there is the question about who worked for Rambus and when. Then there are all those funny press releases on Rambusite implying that Rambus would soon monopolize the entire DRAM market.
Think about one reason given for the direction of the DOJ/Microsoft decision, credibility again.
Rambus should go back to designing hardware and give up the politics and litigation. And, for goodness sake, they should stop trying to emulate "The Lying Guy" from old Saturday Night Live episodes. "Look at all those patents on the JEDEC table, I Wish a few of them were ours. Yeah, that's the ticket, we'll claim they are all ours!".
The real reason he threw it out... (Score:2)
Also on C-NET . . . (Score:5)
Another satisfied Crucial customer (Score:2)
I also recently grabbed a couple sticks of 256mb DDR memory from Crucial. Good price, free shipping, and they're now happily running in an Athlon Tbird, FIC AD11. Nice stuff.
racketeering charges? (Score:2)
I heard that Rambus only opens their board of directors to racketeering charges if they appeal.
Does anybody have more information on this?
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:1)
I do not work of Micron/Crucial but I have bought A LOT of RAM from them in the past 6 months.
Re:Reality (Score:1)
License agreements (Score:4)
Re:More high-tech patent news (Score:1)
Seriously, a working Palm-oil fuel patent is exactly the sort of thing that *ought* to be granted. Not all patents are bad. Just *most* of them!
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:1)
Re:Shares were halted? (Score:2)
Both.
The exchanges regularly halt trading of issues shortly before big news items break regarding the issue. IBM always stops trading at about 3 PM on the says it announces earnings, as do many companies that announce earnings shortly after the market closes.
Re:License agreements (Score:1)
Re:RMBS flushing out... (Score:1)
Re:Also on C-NET . . . (Score:1)
"RAMBUS Loses; Voes to Appeal"
Umm. Duh.
How often do you hear:
"RAMBUS Loses; Its cool with them."
And here's an URL that actually works (Score:1)
Argh! Let me try that again... (Score:1)
Re:Reality (Score:2)
>model and diversified revenue stream. Putting
>your eggs in one basket doesn't create a
>catalyst, it creates a huge risk.
Coca-cola's been selling one product for a hundred years now.
As Mark Twain said, puting all your eggs in one basket and WATHING THAT BASKET is often a good idea. Beats spreading yourself too thin doing 15 things poorly.
Rambus's problem is that their original business idea (rambus memory) turned out to be a technical dud along the lines of itanium and pentium 4. (Great in theory, doesn't work so well in practice). So they turned to suing everybody in sight, which is NOT a core business.
Rob
Re:Not so much about patent law (Score:2)
In US v. United Shoe Machinery Company, it was ruled that a company could not use the patent laws of the USA as a means to keep out competitors; you have to remember at the time United Shoe had a fairly large portfolio of critical patents on various aspects of shoe-making machines, and United Shoe used them to effectively shut down all competition.
Rambus is using their patents on SDRAM to try to extort money from other companies, despite the fact that Rambus doesn't really make any product per se. This is a major no-no based on the case I cited.
Reality (Score:5)
"In our view, if Rambus loses the Infineon case, the stock loses its catalyst," Edelstone wrote in a research note earlier this week.
Does anyone else see way too many things wrong with this quote?
Stocks should be based on a company's business model and diversified revenue stream. Putting your eggs in one basket doesn't create a catalyst, it creates a huge risk. Few computer companies make their money in court, and not only because it is unethical to do so, but because it is also unreliable. Any student of history knows the massive temper tantrums the courts have had in the past century and how often they have affected everything big business.
Who wants to guess at the likelyhood that Mr. Edelstone has Rambus technology in the memory chips of the computer he used to type the research note? In essence, he and other investors are paying Rambus to charge them more for memory, and the money is going around and around in a circle, creating the illusion of profit. This is what bubbles are made of.
Re:Reality (Score:1)
Coca Cola had more than one product since 1946, when they introduced Minute Maid.
Re:RMBS flushing out... (Score:1)
Re:Also on C-NET . . . (Score:1)
"Rambus Loses, Declares Bankruptcy"
:-)
Hoser! (Score:1)
As described in this official Canada Post news release [canadapost.ca], Santa's address is:
Santa Claus
North Pole HOH OHO
Canada
This has been a public service announcement.
Cheering on Micron, Infineon, et al. . . . why? (Score:2)
The reasons for this are obvious. Rambus' patents are bogus, were obtained fraudelently, and are being used as a tool to tax and stifle innovation, not contribute to it. This ongoing saga embodies the corruption and hypocrisy that permeates the current US patent system as it pertains to technology. So it's good to see a judge acknowledge an instance of abuse.
However, in hindsight, I begin to wonder: Did Rambus ever REALLY have a chance? Here's a single upstart company, with a few million in market cap (at first), trying to take on some of the biggest multinational technology companies in the world. Did they really think they would be able to win, armed with something as inconsequential as THE LAW? What if Rambus' patents were legitimate? Do you really think the outcome would be any different?
Why should we cheer on Micron, Infineon, and all the other corporations that have become targets of Rambus' litigious business model? Do we really think that, if they felt that they had a realistic chance of success, they wouldn't do the EXACT same thing that Rambus is doing now? Like any other corporation, none of the players in this game have any ethic higher than that of profit.
By all means, celebrate Rambus' defeat. For their unethical business practices, they deserve to burn. However, I view this case as nothing more than dueling firehoses of money. Rambus' firehose has less pressure to it, so they'll probably lose. Remember that Law is FOR SALE. If you can throw enough money at a good lawyer, a judge will overturn anything for you. Neat how that works.
When I see a legal victory in which principle and ethics triumph over money, when I see one of the many DeCSS defendents win their case, THEN I'll celebrate.
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:5)
I bought 4GB of RAM from Crucial, 2 Tyan Thunder 2500s, and ordered 4 PIII CuMines. I got the RAM and motherboards in normal time, but the CPUs ended up being back ordered for several months.
After I got the CPUs I found that the RAM that Crucial had listed on their site as being compatible with the board actually didn't work with the board. So I called Crucial about an exchange. Since so much time had passed the first person I talked to didn't know if they could do it. But after they talked to a manager, they said it would be no problem. I got the exchange, and since RAM prices had dropped in the mean time, they gave me some money back.
I have no problem recommended Micron/Crucial to anyone.
Re:Also on C-NET . . . (Score:1)
And they all think they're *so* *funny*!
This has been going on for years! Please, someone, make it stop! Mod them all into oblivion!
(Score: -1000, Redundant)
AAAAAAARGH!
Sorry WRONG article(Re:CDMA on steroids) (Score:1)
Rambus vows to appeal... (Score:2)
Holding breath.
Re:dot-com business plan (Score:2)
I think that the patent would only be good till 2007, so there'd be an absolute max of 6 years. With the right licencing terms a manufacturer might be better off sucking it up for 6 years rather than go through the expense of switching technologies.
Re:Reality (Score:1)
James
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:2)
Been there, done that, got 256 megs of PC1600 DDR SDRAM from Crucial in my GHz Athlon box to prove it. :-) At $95, it was also the least expensive DDR SDRAM at the time...an added bonus. I think you can get PC2100 for the same (or maybe less) now, but I haven't checked lately.
I'm a boneheaded moderator. (Score:1)
Mandrake 7.2 and KDE 2 for me? for free?
I did it. (Score:1)
Mandrake 7.2 and KDE 2 for me? for free?
Re:Stick a fork in RMBS, they're done. (Score:1)
Agreed. Good idea with the stock at $18. Not necessarily a good idea with the stock now at $15.
(Remember, RMBS dropped to $15 from ~30ish on the first "big hints" that they were gonna lose the case - we can therefore assume that "RMBS Loses" means a stock price of around $15.)
The dismissal of 54 claims the other week was the other "big hint". The high probability of them losing the case had already been priced into the stock until yesterday, when RMBS ran up to $18 on the news of the 3.5% gouging on DDR contracts in an effort to squeeze DDR out of the market.
Only with the stock at $18 was put-buying "easy money", and had I done so, I'd probably have taken some money off the table as soon as the stock reopened for trading this afternoon.
And I still wouldn't have done it with more than about 2-3% of my portfolio. As you say, it takes macho huevos, and the RMBS game is a little too heavy for me to play anywhere but on paper.
Stick a fork in RMBS, they're done. (Score:3)
> "If today's decision is allowed to stand, all companies that innovate risk having their intellectual property rights unjustly expropriated."
Ah, I love the smell of roasted landsharks in the morning. Smells like... victory.
You can always tell how desperate a company is by the number of times it uses the word "innovate".
My only regret is that I lacked the testicular fortitude to load up on RMBS puts this morning. Easy money.
Gosh! (Score:1)
"We don't understand, we figured out a way to get free money from everyone and they're not cooperating!" says Rambus offal.
On a lighter note, "At the time of the trading halt, the shares were trading at $15.50, down $2.65, or more than 14 percent, before the halt."
At the bottom of the page it says that Rambus stock is worth about 13.11$. What does 'trading halt' mean again?
Huh, that's odd, when I went back to check the article, it's no longer listing Rambus's stock price at the bottom.
Re:Recommendation? (Score:1)
Re:This can't go on much longer.... (Score:2)
I'm Impressed with this judge (Score:1)
Nanosystems rules! (Score:1)
RMBS may appeal, but... (Score:1)
Infineon: $325M
Rambus: $138M
How much cash can Rambus burn on attorney fees? Even without cash, Infineon has much more financial power. In the worst situation, Infineon can sell a building or two, but Rambus?
Whic sort of reflects the basis of the two companies: one is a huge, 26B mkt cap chip maker (with tons of IP created over the years) while Rambus is a one-trick company, that lasts until the SDRAM/DDR license users feel like submitting themselves to that single trick.
I wouldn't bet one dime on Rambus' chances, and therefore, I am happy I am not a RMBS shareholder. And note, I have not even touched the legal/ethical aspect of the trial.
Re:RMBS flushing out... (Score:2)
-----------------------
Re:Reality (Score:1)
I don't see any rambus t-shirts on the market...
nor do i see anyone sporting a nifty new rambus tattoo...
----
I already do... (Score:1)
512Megs of 133Mhz Infineon RAM.. at today's prices, you can get that for about 140$ in some places. Locally (here in Canada), this Infineon RAM is selling for 105$Cnd for a 256Meg stick.. so about 75$ US.. such a sweeeeeet deal..
malloc 30 bytes?... ah what the hell... gimme 4k, RAM is cheap and all my SUV(RAM guzzling) software is quite happy... I think I need to start a few more services.. I'm still not using enough RAM...
Re:Yah! (Score:2)
And by the time that gets through the courts all current memory technologies will likely be obsolete.
Innovashun (Score:1)
Maybe not living in the USA is a disadvantage for me, because I don't understand this talk about innovation and how it is getting crushed all the time.
Clipped from the page:
Now, on an innovation is something new. Does getting shown up to have a bogus lawsuit cause you to lose the ability to make something new? They are intentionally missing the point, utterly and completely. Rambus is twisting words. Same with that Microwhat? company.
Re:Shares were halted? (Score:1)
"It seems unlikely Rambus (memory) will ever be a high-volume, mainstream memory technology," he said.
This pretty much says the future of Rambus' business. IANAL, but it looks like RDRAM is the only thing they've got now (they have a desidingly negative ruling against them) and even Intel, its strongest backer, is conceding that RDRAM will never become the high-speed memory standard; DDR SDRAM is the future.
Re:Innovation is not the point (Score:2)
Yay! (Score:1)
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:1)
dot-com business plan (Score:2)
Boneheaded moderators (Score:1)
Holding breath.
Who is the humorless dweeb who moderated the parent post down as off topic? The quality of moderation here is bad and getting worse.
And yes, this post is definitely off topic, so have your way with it.
Re:Reality (Score:1)
You're right. Analysts are the excact opposite of investors. When they recommend buying, they sell and vica versa.
- Steeltoe
Fifty Seven Declarative Statements (Score:2)
Mr. Rambus stands up on a soapbox and shouts something about Mr. Infineon. It is an accusation, a claim that Mr. Infineon has committed some grave offense. The common rabble is worried, and asks for evidence. They are dedicating their time and money to listen to Mr. Rambus shout, time and money they could be using to be productive themselves. But they take Mr. Rambus seriously, so they let him shout and ask for evidence.
Mr. Rambus is unable to come up with any evidence. Everyone involved reaches the conclusion that Mr. Rambus is full of it, and they go home. Now -- Mr. Rambus has lost face in front of a lot of people, but it is not difficult to imagine that if he had another legitimate complaint, people might listen to him. But if he started shouting a second time, demanding the time and attention of all the people involved, and still had nothing to go on -- well, eventually people would ignore him.
Now imagine that, instead of just shouting a second time, he shouted 56 more times. People had to drop what they were doing and dedicate time and energy to listen him go on and on about claims that, eventually, were found to be baseless. He would be thrown out of the community for wasting so much of everyone's time.
While we don't all congregate every time someone shouts something bad about someone else in real life, it's not that far from the truth. Every claim someone makes against someone else requires taxpayer dollars for our court system to review it. The judge's time is taken away from other things. And in this case, the case didn't even proceed -- Rambus and his shouting were thrown out of court. The societal equivalent to being told 'you, sir, are full of it. Get out of here and never return.' Once upon a time, this would be humbling. You would spend a lot of time making up to the community the resources you'd forced them to spend. You'd apologize to the parties involved. But Mr. Rambus is too proud to do that. He relies on his capitalist system without any kind of the temperence necessary to make capitalist work for someone else besides the capitalist. He is going to spend more time and more money, even after he was told by his peers (does anyone out there actually AGREE with Rambus?) and the law that he's wasting everyone's time.
O, how I long for the days when such people would be put in stocks in the public square....
Re:Recommendation? (Score:3)
They also have a decent FAQ covering issues like buffered/nonbuffered, registered/nonregistered, ecc/non-ecc, edo, etc. For ECC in particular, I believe that your system has to specifically be able to use it....
-- fencepost
Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:4)
Re:dot-com business plan (Score:1)
Perhaps monetarily speaking, this would be true. The companies may be better off sucking it up, but there are also incentives for the companies NOT to pay RamBUST and develop some open standardL
Besides, I personally think RamBUST is holding its patents in an unconstitutional way. RamBUST is clearly not holding those patents with the whole "advancement of Science and useful Arts" (paraphrased) deal in mind. They are holding the patents to suck money in. Are they using ANY of that money to develop new, superior technology?
Naw, a patent-lawyer costs too much.
send a voodoo curse to RAMBUS! (Score:3)
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:1)
BTW, I noticed that my new Dell Inspiron 8000 laptop came with Infineon RAM... cool :)
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:2)
I would think this will happen more or less automatically, if the other manufacturers are paying a $2 per 128 MB chip royalty for DDR (as mentioned in the article) and some other relatively high royalty for normal SDRAM.
RMBS flushing out... (Score:1)
I have one thing to say, SCREW you people who supported such a company, you diserve to be burned. It's not a flame, it's a fact. When it was flying high, it was clear that rambus's buisness practices were questionnable, and one reason this stock rocketed among others was that people thought they would have cash from any kind of memory sold (so a big cash cow). Sorry but other people developped memory as well and other companies spent $$$ into R&D and RAMBUS cannot just steal that IP away. You supported that by investing? you burn!.
People who actually bought that thing over 30$, just a rule of thumb, if you're buying a stock with a P/E of over 30-50, either you've got inside scoop on what's gonna happen or you've done serious Due dilligence. FYI, at 15$, the P/E is around 23. at 100$ heh, it's crazy... it's like the
The technology itself isn't all bad and I'd like to see the alpha with 5-channel rambus, that would just SCREAM. But I surely won't support a company who base it's buisness model on screwing it's competitors with self-claimed technologies that they didn't produce themselves at 100%.
Re:The basic elements of a valid contract... (Score:1)
The offer must be accepted by the offeree
You've been hanging around business analysts too long.
Analyst 1: What shall we call that thing at the other end of the relationship?
Analyst 2: Hmm, just stick a couple of 'e's on the end, nobody will notice.
Who does a king rule over? Kingees, Who's in prison, gaolees, who supports Heart of Midlothian? Jamborees
Re:The basic elements of a valid contract... (Score:1)
Heh, I was only mucking about, precisely because I'm sitting around business analysts at the moment adding two 'e's on to any noun going. I guess they do it because the added effort of trying to find the right word doesn't really add much value to the job they are doing, but it doesn't stop me taking the piss.
One day I may learn to take things seriously
Re:This can't go on much longer.... (Score:2)
If I recall, some of their financial relases indicated some really MASSIVE budgeting for legal expenses (and seem to recall warnings that if they didnt' prevail, their earnings projections might a little...uhhhh....off. I was glad to see the ruling. Rambus got greedy by trying to force rambus memory like a childish bully... saying they'd charge much larger royalties on ddr then sdram..something many said they didn't rightfully have in the first place. I find it interesting...esp. with rambus arrogant anouncement of their intentions upfront. It's a little like a slap suit...for money and nuisiance. Thankfully the likes of a Micron had their own little slap-back attitude. Hopefully they'll prevail. 2002 earnings should be interesting. If they don't win on appeal, there goes minimally sdram maybe ddr? royalties. Intel, whith whom they're no longer bedmates will be seilling a lot more pentium 4's by then... for motherboards that'll have chipsets supporting ddr at that point, and rambus memory will still be massively overpriced compared to ddr as who's going to buy it??. Hopefully the lawyers are billing regularly, or they'll have to hire their own lawyers to make sure they get paid....just a little very biased (thanks to rambus) opinion. I wouldn't want to be responsible for rambus share price ESPECIALLY if they've put their money into lawyers and not research (be interesting comparison to see what got more for 2001). Those class action lawyers for stockholders are probably salivating already.
another patent debate (Score:2)
The curious thing about all this points to an interesting problem with patents that has nothing to do with the usual patent debates on
There was an analogy I heard made somewhere during the MS antitrust trial of taking property by eminent domain in the supposed case of a government takeover of a privately owned toll bridge. The idea was that an essential service controlled by a private entity is a Bad Thing; this is the logic behind the formation of the Federal Reserve, for example (so that the US Gov't wouldn't have to be dependent on the corporate whims of JP Morgan).
So what comes out of this is the possibility that maybe a patent should not be granted when it might create a proprietary form of a technology that was previously public domain/commodity. Now I haven't really thought through the implications of this, but it does seem to follow from the spirit of US patent law. Any thoughts?
/Brian
Re:It's a little early for celebration (Score:2)
Go pick up a copy of the book Voodoo Science by Robert Park. There's a considerable amount on "free-energy" artists, especially a man named Joe Newman who claims to have invented a high-voltage electric motor that gets more energy out than goes in. The climax of the Joe Newman angle comes in front of the Senate when John Glenn suggests putting connecting the output of the device to the input to see if it does what Newman says it does, but what leads up to it is more interesting.
Newman was denied a patent for his machine thanks to the long-standing USPTO policy against allowing patents for perpetual motion devices. He sued in federal court, and the judge on the case was none other than Judge Jackson. Jackson appointed an expert to examine the case, but threw out the expert's conclusion in favor of Newman when he realized two things:
a) the report made no sense; there was no way that the results could be what was said and
b) the expert happened to have a conflict of interest in Newman's favor, being connected to a patent attorney that had been involved in Newman's original patent application.
Maybe Tom Jackson is incapable of not running his mouth at critical moments, but every indication is that he was precisely the individual needed to preside over the MS antitrust case. His track record is one of meticulous research on his cases, it would seem...
/Brian
Re:Shares were halted? (Score:3)
I feel sorriest for Intel, though. They've been skirting the edge of fuckedcompany.com for over a year now because of their supply problems and brain-gimped management (sorry, there is no excuse whatsoever for a company in Intel's position to lose the amount of ground they had). They roped the P4 to Rambus and wound up getting screwed... Not good.
/Brian
This can't go on much longer.... (Score:2)
And might I say that it's nice to see the bad guy get it via lawyers' fees for a change, as opposed to genuinely innovative companies like Aureal.
Re:License agreements (Score:5)
even though the patents have been invalidated
The patents haven't been invalidated (yet). The judge merely declared that Infineon didn't violate them.
This is going to be messy (Score:2)
So, what happens now with the spineless companies that backed down; they can't exactly turn around and take Rambus to court after signing a licensing agreement. The only way they could escape the license is if the patents were found to be invalid. Rambus (unfortunatly) is dead yet.
right to innovate lawsuits? (Score:2)
innovate... that word is tossed around so much today that i'm not sure that anyone really remembers what it means. it's become a buzzword like synergy or crap like that.
all i want (and i'm not the only one) is for people to stand up and demand somthing real from big business! not lawsuits and bickering and this and that. give us somthing we can use! microsoft blathers on about innovation but we've already discussed that. now RAMBUS goes on crying about having its innovation taken away! it's underhanded, it's sneaky and it's not doing a damned thing for the customer! innovation gives something back! it doesn't take and take and take so that someone's stock can go up so they can buy another million dollar house while their customers are screwed!
maybe i'm just pissed off and am not making any sense, but this is insane.
Re:Reality (Score:2)
Re:Yah! (Score:3)
Re:Appeals (Score:2)
The Rambus model of Success(?): 10% Inspiration, 90% Litigation
--
Recommendation? (Score:2)
Buffered, non-buffered?
Ecc, non-ecc?
I don't know how these translate into performance and reliability. I'd like to get the PC2100, in 256M pcs.
--
Not so much about patent law (Score:4)
What remains is Infineon's RICO charges, and contention that the patents are invalid. All that was decided was that Infineon didn't infringe, or the infringement was less than intentional.
Still up: Hynix (Hyundai) and Micron. Micron should be very interesting.
The vow to appeal is obligatory, in the the dismissed charges, as as it stands, Rambus' position is weakened. A great place to track, day to day is RMBS on Yahoo [yahoo.com]
--
Appeals (Score:2)
And noJudge Shopping [slashdot.org] either!
Innovation is not the point (Score:2)
Companies innovate new technologies all the time, and profit from them. It's the "innovate while sitting on a industry standards board, keeping quiet about what you've done but help lead the consensus toward your unannounced innovation, drop out of the board and try to make them all pay for your patent" that companies will have a hard time doing in the future. And rightly so.
Yah! (Score:2)
Now Rambus is going to have to *gasp* actually make a product instead of just go after other companies.
Of course, imagine how the other memory companies are looking right now, now that Infineon is royalty-free for the time being. One wonders if other companies are going to now announce that they are going to discontinue sending rambus royalty checks.
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:2)
This case is far from over, and it might have been better had it gone to trial, but the fact that all of RAMBust's claims of DDR/SDRAM infringement on their patents is definately NOT a good thing for them.
The judge wouldn't have tossed the case unless convinced that RAMBust's shennanigans with JEDEC would invalidate their patents, as they apply to JEDEC SDRAM and DDR SDRAM.
It can be said that this case wasn't the right forum to argue the invalidity of RAMBust's patents, and their possible criminal conduct. That will require a new suit, brought by the JEDEC group against them. The judge simply ruled based on the evidence that RAMBust's case against Infineon had no merit, and did what he was supposed to do, toss it.
Note that this judge did his duty, and made his ruling based on the law, and the evidence, rather than reading the "text" of the RAMBust patents and applying them (or at least the parts most favorable to RAMBust's claims) as gospel as did the irresponsible "judge" Kaplan of DeCSS notoriety.
Re:This can't go on much longer.... (Score:2)
You would think so
If the royalties from SDRAM and DDR SDRAM stop coming in, RAMBust's money supply will dry up quickly. There probably are not enough sales of RAMBUS to sustin the litigious leech of a company's production (lawsuits) at their 2001 levels for long
Re:License agreements (Score:2)
If Infineon didn't violate them by producing SDRAM/DDR SDRAM, then none of those licensing RAMBust's (allegedly) fradulently obtained patents would be violating them either by producing SDRAM/DDR SDRAM without paying royalties.
Re:Yah! (Score:2)
The tossing of the case against Infineon, and the evidence introduced by them and Micron concering RAMBust's JEDEC shennanigans wouuld suggest that Samsung et all could sue RAMBust for getting these contracts on a fradulent basis.
If Infineon didn't violate RAMBust IP/patents, then neither did anyone else.
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:2)
Which is why it's in the best interest of every memory manufacturer who is not Micron or Infineon to IMMEDIATELY sue RAMBust for fraud.
Not to mention that when such a suit is initiated, they might be able to get a judge to put an injunction preventing RAMBust from collecting royalties... This would cut off their air supply. After all, lawyers only work when fed, unless you are someone with a compelling case, and you happen to run into a Clarence Darrow (I wonder if he exists today). RAMBust does NOT have a compelling case that would motivate ANY lawyer to work for them pro-bono
RAMBust will not survive the whole industry suing them.
Re:Also on C-NET . . . (Score:2)
"Rambus Loses, Declares Bankruptcy"
That is inevitable at this point, and in fact, always was (the producers in the memory industry would have eventually come up with a non-RAMBust IP standard that would freeze them out).
What is most likely is that one of the "Dramuri" (Register term) will end up buying RAMBust.
Re:dot-com business plan (Score:3)
Maybe not, on the surface... IF RDRAM had been a superior product (which it wasn't), if RAMBust hadn't resorted to suing all their customers, and IF RAMBust hadn't acquired the SDRAM and DDR SDRAM patents in such a dodgy manner (by allegedly defrauding the JEDEC group), it might have worked.
We can hope this teaches future IT startups a lesson... You can't make it in the industry with an inferior product, lawyers, and (allegedly) fradulently gained IP. RAMBust should have gone back to the drawing board and designed a product that would actually benefit the PC market they wanted to get into instead of resorting to bully tactics.
I don't know which was dumber... RAMBust suing all their customers, or RAMBust suing all their customers over IP that they KNEW they had obtained illegitimatly...
Even should RAMBust's claims to patents on SDRAM and DDR SDRAM (less likely given this case), at BEST their royalty gravy train would have not lasted any more than 3-5 years MAX.
The rest of the industry would have formed a JEDEC-esque group and engineered an open standard for memory beyond DDR/RAMBUS, and RAMBust wouldn't have been invited... You don't make it in an industry by pissing on all your friends.
Re:right to innovate lawsuits? (Score:3)
Like this?
RAMBUS: Our stolen IP didn't stand? We lost our right to su.. uhh... INNOVATE!
INFINEON: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
(a slightly modified famous and very funny line from "The Princess Bride")
The trial WILL continue! (Score:3)
"Beyond that, the continuing trial in Richmond will draw even greater interest as the jury will decide whether Rambus engaged in alleged restraint of trade and fraud by keeping its synchronous patent applications hidden while a member of the industry JEDEC panel drafting an open SDRAM standard.
Infineon this week started calling witnesses to testify on Rambus conduct at JEDEC. Attorneys for the German firm have also disclosed handwritten notes by Rambus patent attorneys describing what was alleged to be urgent pleas from Rambus officials to amend the applications in 1998 and 1999 to cover JEDEC features. "
In other words, IT AINT OVER YET!!!!
The patents may still be ruled invalid (looking likely) and some RAMBust exec might see the inside of a "Federal pound me in the ass prison" as well he/she/it deserves for their conduct...
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:3)
I rather doubt that... Apparently enough evidence of fraud on the part of RAMBust has already been presented to the judge in this case to invoke the RICO law discovery process.
Already, Infineon has released very DAMMING evidence that RAMBust intentionally set out to manipulate and defraud JEDEC (by breaching their contract by not revealing their pending patents, and influencing the group to adopt enough of this IP so as to ensure that the RAMBust patent would cover the JEDEC SDRAM.
Not only that, but after leaving JEDEC, RAMBust used information from a secret inside source ("secret squirrel") to further modify their SDRAM patent.
Given all this, it will be VERY difficult for RAMBust to plead ignorance.
Contracts obtained in violation of the law and in a fradulent manner are tossed out all the time. In fact, obtaining a contract for something in a fradulent way is itself a crime! This is no different than going around to companies, and telling them "we own the patent on mice, pay up or we sue" when they own no such thing.
In other words, IANAL, RAMBust's contracts can only be legal if their claims to own JEDEC SDRAM/DDR SDRAM are true (as this was the basis they forced Samsung, et all, into the contracts)
Already, this judge has tossed out claims that Infineon infringed on RAMBust patents by producing JEDEC SDRAM/DDR SDRAM. That gives anyone with a contract the basis to sue RAMBust, for licensing to them something they dont' own, and/or comitting fraud against them.
I suspect that it will happen. There will either be a bunch of individual lawsuits, or else an industry class action suit against RAMBust, probably by the time they can get their appeal heard.
Why you may ask? Isn't that expensive? Yes it is. But, remember, not even ONE of these companies paying RAMBust royalties on SDRAM/DDR SDRAM did it out of love, they did it by FORCE. No one likes RAMBust, and the rest of the memory industry most definately wants to see them die.
Forcing RAMBust to defend their contracts in court will not only cost RAMBust money they then can't spend in more offensive lawsuits, but it will begin to close off their money supply step by step, until they are bankrupt.
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:3)
That's cool. I've never met anyone who's had problems with Micron/Crucial memory. I personally always order from Crucial and I recommend to friends and co-workers that they do the same. The prices are actually quite reasonable for top quality memory, and they have an excellent warranty as well.
That being said, I have nothing against buying Infineon memory either. If Crucial would ever go away, they'd be next on my list simply because they stood up to the IP bully.
Re:Yah! (Score:3)
Nah, first they'll have their lawyers appeal. And in the meantime, they are still collecting royalties from a) RDRAM and b) companies that decided to "license" SDRAM and DDR SDRAM from them to begin with.
Of course, imagine how the other memory companies are looking right now, now that Infineon is royalty-free for the time being. One wonders if other companies are going to now announce that they are going to discontinue sending rambus royalty checks.
There might be some egg on their face, but they're not home free yet. For starters, the "licensing agreements" that yield the royalties for Rambus are contracts. IANAL, but I imagine that there will still be some legal wrangling that Samsung and the others will have to go through to get out of those deals (maybe make a case that they were based on invalid patents???). But that process can't even begin until the case has been appealed and re-appealed and finally settled.
Re:Time to buy... (Score:3)
They have been for quite a while now. They'd be trading even lower if they hadn't stopped trading on it before the decision was announced. But even at 10% of their previous price, it's hardly a bargain if the company proves to have an unsustainable business model (or its only revenue generating product tanks a la RDRAM). I can't possibly imagine why so many people have been so bullish on it's stock for so long to begin with (unless it was dot-com induced euphoric mania).
Re:It's a little early for celebration (Score:2)
The other patents are the foreign versions of the ones in the US suit. Having lost in the US the chance of wining elsewhere on the same patent claims is very small.
Rambus failled to get the case to trial. That is significant and places them in a very bad position for an appeal. Rambus can only appeal on a point of law. The district court is generally given defference to on matters of fact - unless as with Judge Penfold Jackass the judge insults the appeals court and labels 'conclusory statements' as 'findings of fact'.
The Micron and Hyundai cases are certain to fail if Infineon fails since they all concern the design of the same product.
Re:racketeering charges? (Score:2)
RICO is a law that trebble damages if a criminal act is performed in a particular manner. First however there has to be a criminal act. An appeal would not affect the criminality of Rambus behavior.
The criminal behavior alleged would be fraudulent claims made in the procurement of the patents or the threats of legal action.
Re:License agreements (Score:3)
Not a bit of it. The Samsung settlement falls if the patent falls. Samsung and co thought that RAMBUS were full of it. However they did not want to fight the case in a US court which might well be as rigged as the US customs system which allows US companies to have arbitrary fines imposed on competitors on the basis of flim flam accusations of 'dumping' - read the foreign plant is more efficient.
Rambus had to settle some of the cases to generate the cash to fight the others so they cut a deal. Samsung agreed to pay royalties but they can revoke the license at will.
As others will surely also state... (Score:3)
What concerns me is the process for determining the patent's applicability. What is the test to determine whether the patents Rambus have cover technology in DDR and others? By virtue of the fact that Rambus took it to court, there must be some form of grey area.
Where does the process stop? Can Rambus win in Germany, and lose in US? Can there be stupid results like that?
Damn right they're going to appeal. (Score:2)
Damn right they're going to appeal, I sure as hell would if it meant a quick payoff of ONE BILLION DOLLARS.
Now whether they are right or not is another matter...
It's a little early for celebration (Score:2)
Granted, this is great news. However, this is only the first step in what promises to be a lengthy and expensive legal battle.
As Rambus pointed out, they're appealing this decision. In addition, this particular case only involved four Rambus patents, and Rambus claims to have over a dozen patents which affect SDRAM manufacture. Finally, just because Infineon escaped doesn't necessarily mean that Micron and Hyundai will as well.
Somebody else pointed out that we should buy Micron and Infineon RAM to show our support. I definitely second that motion.
Re:Buy Micron & Infineon RAM!!! (Score:4)
--
Re:License agreements (Score:4)
--