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: Bilow who wrote (51270)	8/26/2000 4:45:11 AM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 93625

Hi Carl, I thought you'd get a kick out of that "4i" redesign. You may not be aware of this but if in fact the 4i crowd is looking for a solution to their LATENCY problems there are, to my knowledge, only three places to go: (1) Fujitsu's FcDRAM methodology; (2) NEC's VCM DRAM [They hold a limited license from RMTR on this IP]; or (3) RMTR's EDRAM IP. I have posted my thoughts on this at the INN: Message 14279068 The license agreement with NEC is particularly interesting. RMTR withheld a specific application of their caching IP from the basic license. I quote the exclusion in the above post. To my "Mom & Pop" eye it appears to be aimed squarely at any kind of application based on a packetized bus design. ...But then again, I could be wrong. If not, it could well be that RMTR will save the DRDRAM bacon, ...and I will one day own a piece of this Gawd Awful Busline. Got to go wash my mouth out with soap now. :8) 0\|0

To: Bilow who wrote (51270)	8/26/2000 8:42:58 PM
From: visionthing	Respond to of 93625

Hi, Blow...you are distorting the facts. Go figure...patent filed in 1993, patent granted in 1999. I wonder?!? HMMM...how they could have collected all of these royalties, during that timeframe? It seems that you are trying to sensationalize each post in an effort to maximize the effect of your BS. To: Don Green who wrote (51254) From: Bilow Saturday, Aug 26, 2000 3:43 AM ET Respond to Post # 51267 of 51319 Hi Don Green; Yesterday I estimated that there was something like $80 billion worth of SDRAM already produced that Rambus somehow failed to collect, say 1% royalties on. It turns out that I underestimated the magnitude of Rambus' apparent error. In addition to failing to collect royalties on the SDRAM makers, they also forgot to collect royalties on the SDRAM chipset makers. I would say that that probably doubles my estimate of the amount of money that Rambus somehow neglected to collect to about 1% of $160 billion, or about $1.6 billion. I've never personally known anyone who's made that expensive of an error. I mean, I've been late with projects, but never so late as to cost a company over a billion dollars. Do you suppose there will be a shareholder lawsuit to find out why the company was so slow in getting their SDRAM patents out? It seems like an IP company could have done it faster than 10 years. The other thing I'd like to know is why has the company taken so long to get these SDRAM royalties out of the industry? If the patent position is so clear, why not sue them all at once? And why did they let Hitachi get away without having to pay back royalties? This is all beginning to smell mighty funny to me. -- Carl P.S. Rambus - the bumbling company that let billions of dollars worth of SDRAM and associated chipsets be produced for six years without them being paid any royalties, thereby missing the bulk of the big SDRAM production years, failing to take advantage of their intellectual property, and blowing their fiduciary duties to their shareholders.