Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jdaasoc who wrote (27701)	8/25/1999 10:04:00 PM
From: capt rocky	Respond to of 93625

thanks a lot,now i get it! can you come program my vcr? rocky

To: Jdaasoc who wrote (27701)	8/25/1999 11:23:00 PM
From: grok	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

RE: <Pulled this off Patent web site from Aug 17 164.195.100.11; On patents there are two issues: 1. Defensive: Has Rambus got the drdram technology safely wrapped up? 2. Offensive: Can Rambus use their patents to attack other dram technology? You can bet that Rambus has filed plenty of patents in order to protect their Intellectual Property rights since IP is their most important product. If they couldn't protect IP rights then dram makers could produce Rambus compatible chips without paying royalties. I'm sure that Tate forced the engineers to long ago file the necessary patents. But for using these patents to sue companies producing DDR or other dram technology I think that it is very unlikely due to prior art. Double data rate has been used for decades. I myself used it in the early 70s to have memory talk to microprocessors. Of course guessing what way the legal profession will take something is even harder than guessing where rmbs will go in the short term. But I expect that as Rambus starts raking in the royalty dough there will be many people who come forth with active patents and try to extort money from Rambus. If Rambus doesn't pay then a long law suit can result. I wouldn't be surprised if this hangs around Rambus' neck for the next 10 years.

To: Jdaasoc who wrote (27701)	8/26/1999 11:14:00 AM
From: NHBob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Thanks, Jd, I needed that. Just as I thot I'd finally purged my veins of techie blood you up and lay that on me. Rising to the challenge, however, 3rd pass thru it starts reading to me like an effort, at least in words, to carve out a patent claim by careful selection of descriptor words, the concepts already 30+ years into play. The task is to somehow make your implementation protectable w/o infringing on someone else's description and implementation. LOL BTW, I'm surprised at the implicit assumption in this description that the clock signal is symmetrical, with the falling edge at 180 degrees. These systems will soon, if they haven't already, use "clocking" signals more like radar system chirps than the square waves we used in days of yore. nhbob