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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: milo_morai who wrote (312)	7/9/2000 10:01:26 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Milo, I wouldn't go quite that deep. After the 820 fiasco, Intel certainly wants to look like they still know how to design a decent chipset. They publish lots of performance numbers, what were they supposed to do? Cripple the 815, or put up numbers that were intentionally degraded? I swore off my bad habit of mocking the guys on the Rambus thread after the patent scam broke in earnest, but I still lurk there on occasion. It's great entertainment to see those guys still going on as if Rambus has something beside the patent scam going for it. Same goes on this one, I see. On the Intel/Rambus relations angle, there was this story that survivin posted here that has another murky hidden angle: Some still think another, apparently unmodified, part of the 1996 agreement may be of more concern to Intel. As disclosed in Rambus' original SEC stock registration filing, the Intel license and contract from Rambus “can be terminated by Rambus upon certain breaches, defaults, or failures by Intel to achieve certain milestones or provide certain support for Rambus technology.” Nothing is spelled out on Intel's precise obligations, but they could be a factor in Intel's inordinate support of Rambus. Also apparently unchanged is a vague provision in the 1996 pact that gives Intel unspecified royalty-free rights to Rambus technology for meeting certain benchmarks that also are not spelled out. ebns.com I always figured the 1-4 million RMBS warrants wasn't near enough money to make up for the trouble Rambus has caused Intel, it wouldn't surprise me if there was a stick buried in there with the carrot. I wonder if Intel was briefed on the patent scam right from the start. Cheers, Dan.