I think that they will stick with Hitachi for the time being and issue notices of infringement to other DDR producers they believe infringe on their patents. In the case of Hitachi, there is ground for "trebble damages", since Hitachi was "taught" RMBS' technology, was approached to inform them that some of their non Rambus devices infringe, and yet Hitachi "wontonly" continued to infringe. Once the courts determine whether Hitachi really infringed, then with that precedent they can turn around and demand royalties from the rest. In principle, if it is quite clear that Hitachi infringes, RMBS should be able to obtain an injunction (at least in the US) preventing further shipments of product to the US. That is what forced Kodak to its knees in the suit with Polaroid.
In the meanwhile, no one likes legal involvement (the 10Q must outline all these, and, IMHO, there is always a outside chance that the basic patents may not stand the test of a legal assault or be "invalidated") and thus the suit, while a very nice shot over the DRAM industry and other FUD'ers bow, will probably not have a great impact on RMBS' price. I think that the market will pay more attention to the , at least temporary, desertion of some players, and the two to three quarters delay in getting RMBS based PC's in the market.
Zeev |
