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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chic_hearne who wrote (118309)	6/29/2000 1:31:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 1584250

Little Chick - Re: "Rambus already has to be near an anti-trust violation for charging more for DDR than DRDRAM." The AMD is near an anti-trust violation for charging more for their AthWiper than their Dupalon. Paul

To: chic_hearne who wrote (118309)	6/29/2000 1:46:00 PM
From: EricRR	Respond to of 1584250

John- I read the Intel/Rambus filling with the SEC, and I think that Paul is right. There do seem to be specific clauses letting Intel out of paying fees for a general catagory of patents. I'm sure a good lawyer can argue it any way they want. And as for competition, I agree with you. Given intel's size and influence, using the Rambus shill to kill DDR in the consumer market would invite gov lawsuits. Especially in that from Rambuses point of view, it shouldn't matter, since they collect fees either way. I think Rambus is trying to bluff mem makers into making Rambus, knowing that the DDR claims they have are not 100%. And this of course plays into Intel's plan, as long as Rambus doesn't actually succed in collecting DDR royalties from all the server memory in the future. That would raise system prices. Since ServerWorks makes some of Intel's server chipsets, I wonder if they are covered by Intel's umbrella?