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: Scumbria who wrote (44781)	6/17/2000 1:55:00 AM
From: richard surckla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria...>>It will be interesting to see how this drama plays out.<< For once we agree!<VBG> Good night!

To: Scumbria who wrote (44781)	6/17/2000 2:06:00 AM
From: eplace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria...What are you doing over on this thread bothering these RMBS folks for? You're looking like the Elmer of the RMBS thread <G>. The only difference is what you are saying has some credence to it while you know what Elmer has to say is a bunch of crap. Ok, ok, I know about your RMBS move that made you 500%, but hang out where someone actually respects what you have to say (at least most of the time <G>. I'm outta here. Ed

To: Scumbria who wrote (44781)	6/17/2000 11:03:00 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria, I too see some evidence of retrograde action on the part of Rambus in attemting to extend their patents to cover DDR after the fact. Since the use of DDr was discussed in the memory standards meetings and then Rambus modified their patent claims it seems to me that those extended claims will be invalid and you can bet everyone and his dog is ready to file interferences on that basis. The contention that the closed meetings are not a public disclosure is not valid as the people who were there are the memory peer group....ie the memory public. Bill