Hi mishedlo; Re "Why are chipsets covered by their IP, why are memory controllers as opposed to memory covered by their IP?"
Rambus' most serious DDR/SDRAM patent is for the register bit(s) that distinguishes CAS delay in SDRAM and DDR. [I.e. CL2 vs CL3 SDRAM.] But the patent (if it is valid for SDRAM) not only covers that register bit, it also covers the technique of how you change the state of that bit. Every time an SDRAM is powered up that register has to be set, and the thing that sets it is the memory controller. Thus Rambus' patents cover the memory controller.
If the memory controller is in a chipset, costing $20, then Rambus presumably takes 4% of that $20. If the memory controller is in a high end integrated CPU that costs $500, (as I expect the industry to converge on within 3 years or so), then Rambus presumably takes 4% of the $500. I think this is ridiculous, and I fully expect to see Rambus spanked hard for having the chutzpah to tell investors this kind of stuff. The Infineon counter lawsuit shows what industry is setting up - a massive industry-wide lawsuit that threatens to halt production of all but embedded DRAM. The issue could be resolved with a commission to assign royalties on the basis of the percentage of the IP owned, and on that basis Rambus' royalties will be reduced to a fraction of a percent.
My figures are higher than Zeev's because I include the chipset (and integrated CPU) prices in the figures, and because I know that DDR, which Rambus charges higher royalties on, is the next mainstream memory.
That said, I believe that the Rambus royalty story will fall apart as they lose court cases. I posted links to papers explaining the EEC and US positions on "essential" patents, and it is obvious why the memory industry is concentrating on the JEDEC connection - that is the most obvious open and shut case against Rambus. I will be really surprised to see Rambus win these lawsuits. But I have been wrong before.
There is no way that Rambus' DDR patents, which are tiny, are worth 3% royalties if their RDRAM patents, which are comprehensive, are only worth 2%. What they are asking is unfair, immoral, and likely illegal. Their threat to shut down memory makers who lose court cases is plainly impossible to carry out, as Zeev has attested. But the courts won't decide on any of this for quite some time, and in the meantime, the insiders will continue to pump the stock with exaggerated press releases (like the OKI agreement) and dump their holdings. Eventually, someone is going to be left holding the bag, and my prediction is that this will be mom and pop, cause mom and pop are the ones who use their "hope" instead of their brain when holding losers.
After it becomes obvious that DDR is the winner, I will quit posting my DDoDDRN type posts, and convert over covering the lawsuit news and insider trading reports.
-- Carl |
