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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (81903)	6/24/2000 11:09:00 AM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

Zeev: Not being a patent expert, I didn't even know that the term "clean room" had meaning beyond its normal reference in the semi industry, until it was explained to me here by Gene. I've had to validate patents in the past many times but I've never had to dig into the complexities of the patenting process itself. That said, I am in the process of acquiring a "crash course" education respecting the more esoteric aspects of the patent game. (g) I do think I'm starting to understand how the RMBS game is being played behind the scenes. Up until a week ago, RMBS enthusiasm rested primarily on the belief that Rdram would take over the world. That appeared nonsensical to me then (and now) and I posted as much, together with my reasons. So far, I think the evidence suggests that my research was reasonably well founded as Rdram penetration has been minimal and doesn't look to be moving quickly enough to cut off DDR. The evidence suggested that Intel was not only weakening in its resolve, but also simply not in a position to force the issue. Few appeared to be designing around Rdram and that usually provides a sense of what is coming. From my perspective, even if Rdram had penetrated as the disciples expected, the fact that the whole industry is entering a massive glut period made the whole thing moot in any event. No way big royalties get paid if the producers aren't making serious dough. The term is "renegotiate" as we both well know. Today, the stock price is in orbit, propelled there by the (in my view) childish belief that an entire industry, is going roll over on a patent that covers a small part of a very large and complex technology. Nyet. The world doesn't work that way. We both know that considerable effort will now be expended to "work around" the RMBS patent. I personally believe that the roll-overs to date were probably in response to "an offer you can't refuse" from RMBS (see my post on the Clown thread Message 13939102 ). Bluntly, I do not blame the involved Dramuria for playing their stage roles in this 2 act play with enthusiasm. Business is business and if a company can book a large, low risk, short term, capital gains profit on proffered RMBS warrants, more power to them. The memory game is brutal and about to become even more so. The market doesn't care where the profits come from. Your warning of last week was a good one, but as I have learned through nasty experience to abstain from investing until I really know what is going on, it was unnecessary although appreciated. Even though I prefer to rely on fundamentals, I keep track of the technical elements of a stock, if only because so many out there act on them. It's extremely valuable to have folks with far superior technical skills confirm my amateurish technical perspectives. How do I view Rambus? A neat company with some decent engineering smarts, but one that has massive exposure to the whims of Intel. Intel has plenty of problems and will do whatever it thinks will benefit Intel. RMBs is a very small pawn that appears to me to be sacrificially positioned. So what is the bottom line? I think the current machinations provide a glimpse into an industry that has cut a deal that everybody can live with. A few Dramuria roll over in return for RMBS warrants. The stock gets belted into outer space. Intel agrees to drop its push on Rdram, and accept what the memory boys want to produce (Sdram, then DDRam). Samsung remains the big (I almost said "only") supplier of Rdram (especially as it owns the territory anyway), which allows it to recoup its investment (through high prices) as the Rdram market peters out. Samsung also pockets a huge profit as a result of its large RMBS warrant position. Intel gets to exercise a large RMBS warrant position for brokering the over-all deal. Everybody connected with RMBS makes beaucoup dough on their stock options (so long as they do not marry the stock). RMBS gets rolled over or buried through a "work around" or new patents. Shall we make a bet as to how close I am in this prognostication? The evidence that the above will prove accurate is significant. Only the "too earlie" shorts and the "true believers" will end up cremated if the above unfolds as I expect. C'est la vie. Best, Earlie

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (81903)	6/24/2000 2:24:00 PM
From: gnuman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Zeev, re: < I doubt that "clean room" conditions is a sufficient condition to determine "obviousness" for patent purposes.> I'm certainly no expert in patents nor "clean room" technology. I was witness to the creation of a "clean room", however, and if memory serves me, the approach was successful. (Been a long time ago). Perhaps "obviousness" comes in degrees of complexity, I don't know. But if a new implementation of a design were as simple as say, modifying some logic, and this would be obvious to any designer, is that patentable? Or if there were a slightly different modification to achieve the same result, would that be infringing? This whole discussion was triggered by a statement attributed to Barrett, and thus the interest. JMHO's