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: NightOwl who wrote (55177)	9/26/2000 1:45:30 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

NightOwl, I think that Rambus chose the right approach with MU. If they seek an injunction on MU production, the case is accelerated in the US. Rambus is better off getting the European cases to proceed earlier, in case there is anything in the "Jedec defense" of Hyundai and MU. In Europe, the Jedec defense is simply irrelevant to the case. If they win in Germany (and as many stated, against a "home team"), that will set a very strong precedent for the US cases, thus after a win in Europe, an injunction against MU would be rational. In the meanwhile, they play domestically the normal delaying tactics lawyers are so good at. Zeev

To: NightOwl who wrote (55177)	9/26/2000 1:55:54 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

<<The "docket entries" reposted to your link indicate that RMBS filed two Motions to Dismiss [for want of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action] late on the 18th of September. Yet we haven't heard the usual bleating of Mr. K or anyone from RMBS. I can only assume that this indicates at least a temporary victory for the RMBS attorneys and a sign that they are taking the MU suit seriously. This bodes well for RMBS' chances.>> I do not understand this argument unless you are saying silence is strengh and they do not want to tip their hand. <<Other than that, the only thing I can glean from this modest information is that RMBS has not asked any US Court to halt MU's U.S. production and sale of SDRAM/DDR. That's a fairly large shoe yet to drop and I don't know why RMBS has not put it in play. I am sure they have their reasons for going the motion to dismiss route first, but I assume it means they don't feel it serves their interests to rush the MU litigation. Based on our complete lack of evidence on the underlying claims, I can't say that I would disagree with such an approach. But the more interesting question for me is what effect, if any, MU's case could have on the other suits and license agreements that might be concluded before it is?>> Is it possible you have that last paragraph backwards? In that I mean, RMBS might want the other cases to settle first in Germany or through arbitration to strengthen their case against MU here. Comments? Then ASSUMING they win in Germany or settle before trial, Hammer MU with what you suggested, ask for stoppage of SDRAM/DDRAM. SPECULATION - If they ask for stoppage now, MU could ask to have it thrown out, could they not? OTOH throwing it out would be much harder after another settlement, court victory, or arbitration wouldn't it? Comments? Obviously if they lose in Germany they are toast, and "The BEARS WIN" but neither of us really knows if this is going to trial. I still think the only case with any realistic chance of making it to trial is MU. But this is just my belief. Final question. Is the result of non-binding "pre-trial" arbitration public? Thanks, and BTW an apology was intended. That said I will not respond favorably to bashing by either side and I have sent private EMAILs to both sides on this. The problem is someone has to stop first and it never lasts. Then we see the next BaahaaaBBHHHHHHAAAAAA BS all over again.