Scumbria,
I was wrong about there not being a way to engineer around the problem.
So there was a conflict, but you no longer believe one of your statements. Therefore, if there are ways around the patent, and the industry wants to fight this enough, it sounds as if they certainly can do it. But I'll stand by my statement that the industry is a lot more pragmatic than you and Carl and that they'll sign.
As for your car example, I can probably think of 50 ways to get out of the car, none of which involve a door (ejection seat, provide hydraulic lift of the car body but not the frame, put no door on the opening, etc., etc., etc.). And that only took 30 seconds. Of course, few of these are worth doing due to cost. If the industry can't come up with as many alternatives in 30 seconds that are cost-justifiable vis-a-vis the cost of the Rambus patents then the Rambus patents are probably pretty important.
Dave |
