SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin
RMBS 99.28+8.0%Jan 2 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dan3 who wrote (59103)10/29/2000 11:18:44 AM
From: Zeev Hed  Read Replies (1) of 93625
 
Dan, have you read those 10 patents? By the way, as a member of LES, I can tell you that the typical benefit accruing to "inventors" of IP is considered "fair" at 25% of the financial benefits enabled by the IP. If RMBS's IP is the only way, so far to get memory to work at frequencies in the post 1 Ghz era, they could claim that "whole benefit" Since gross margins in this field should be in the 25% to 30% (INTC goes all the way to 60%)6% to 7.5% royalties rate (all IP) would not be inconceivable. Thus 1% for SDRAM and 2% or higher for RDRAM and DDR would not be excessive at all.

Look at it another way. If RDRAM or DDR are the only way that AMD and INTC can sell at high premiums their 1Ghz plus products (maybe a total of $5 B/year "financial benefit"), why should RMBS not be entitled to 25% of that financial benefit? You know why, because RMBS' lawyers were not smart enough to patent a method of operating a CPU in conjunction with a memory whereby their unique protocol of communication and their unique method of using double clocking is exploited. At least they did not in the 10 patents or so I reviewed. Maybe they did in other patents, and maybe that is one reason Barrett is a little "upset".

Zeev
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext