FROM RAMBUSITE.COM
Clearly not mine Carl - LOL
swiftsolution.com
By: CLEARSTATION
Reply To: 9/20/2000 8:17:00 PM
Post #502 of 598
Analysis of Micron's Complaint
Excerpted from my posting on the clearstation message board:
I studied the Micron lawsuit when it came out and, if their complaint represents the sum total of their case, then they have no case.
THE MICRON ALLEGATIONS:
Micron claims the Rambus patents are not "infringed" by Micron; are "invalid" for failure to meet the requirements of patent laws; and are "unenforceable" based upon patent misuse, equitable estoppel, and violations of antitrust laws.
MY RESPONSE TO THESE ALLEGATIONS:
Micron claims that patents are "invalid" because they fail to meet the requirements of patent law. But Micron never offers any evidence of prior art in their lawsuit. Give me a break! If you are going to make a statement like that, you have better reference a prior patent number, or first use, or public disclosure by someone else. According to patent law, the alleged infringer has to provide "clear and convincing" evidence of patent invalidity.
Next, Micron claims the Rambus patents are "unenforceable" because Rambus has violated antitrust laws by having a monopoly or by illegally leveraging their market monopoly.
But intellectual property laws allows Rambus to be a legitimate monopoly. A valid United States patent gives its owner the right to exclude others from [practicing the patented process], making, using, offering to sell, or selling the patented invention [a product made by the patented process] within [or importing the patented invention into] the United States, its territiories, and its possessions. A patent owner that believes someone is infringing on his or her exclusive rights under a patent may bring a lawsuit to stop the alleged infringing acts and recover damages.
Also, Rambus has not leveraged their monopoly unlawfully because they have not tied the sales of any Rambus nonpatented products to the sales of any Rambus patented products.
In essence, Rambus doesn't make or sell any products--neither "patented products," nor "nonpatented products." Instead, Rambus owns several "patented processes" that they license to companies that manufacture SDRAM, DDR SDRAM, RDRAM and other Synchronous DRAM interface products.
Rambus owns the patents and they can charge different rates based on the patents' utilization by manufacturers in the different product lines, such as, SDRAMs, DDR SDRAMs, RDRAMs or any other Synchronous DRAM interface products. As long as the rates are offered uniformly to all licensees on the same product lines, there is no discrimination. Of course, once an infringer loses in a lawsuit, the infringer can be charged a higher rate than the rest of the industry.
The Micron case is just plain bogus.
Now I will address the multiple Micron claims related to Rambus' involvement in the JEDEC. Micron claims that the Rambus patents are not "infringed" because Micron feels it is entitled to free use of the patents due to Rambus' participation in the JEDEC--or that the Rambus patents are "invalid" or "unenforceable" due to reasons of Rambus fraud, deception and breach of contract with the JEDEC.
According to patent law, a patent holder must only provide "a preponderance of evidence" to prove his case of patent infringement, which is a lower level of proof than "clear and convincing evidence." But, as you recall, an alleged patent infringer that claims "patent invalidity" as a defense has to show clear and convincing evidence.
Based on the quantity and quality of JEDEC evidence provided in the Micron lawsuit, I strongly believe that Micron will not be able to meet this level of proof. Rambus participation in the JEDEC is NOT a concern.
Show me "clear and convincing evidence" by way of a written, signed and dated statement by Rambus that agrees to the alleged JEDEC terms that were in effect at the time; a document trail that proves Rambus violated the said terms; and evidence that the terms have been consistently enforced for all JEDEC members--and then, and only then, would I change my mind.
The Micron case remains bogus.
Micron thought they could put pressure on Rambus to get a better licensing deal. But look at whose stock dropped the most after they filed the complaint.
If Micron doesn't settle, then Micron will lose in court and Rambus will either charge them higher royalty fees and let them stay in business--or--Rambus will ask judge to tripple the damages assessed because of willful patent infringement and grant Rambus a permanent injuction on all Micron products utilizing a Synchronous DRAM interface.
The latter action would force Micron into bankruptcy/liquidation and create numerous lawsuits by its shareholders.
I am not an attorney but this is my honest opinion based upon my extensive research of patent/antitrust laws and the evidence submitted by the alleged infringers to date.
End of story.
CLEARSTATION_10F2
EOM.
NEXT MESSAGE FOLLOWS:
swiftsolution.com
by: CLEARSTATION
Reply To: 9/20/2000 9:01:00 PM
Post #503 of 598
Damages for Patent Infringement.
Excerpts from my prior posting on the Yahoo Finance Message Board.
###
The following material is excerpted from the publication, "Proving Patent Damages to a Jury," located at fr.com
Reference Subheading 1. The hypothetical negotiation--the battle of the experts.
"One method of determining reasonable royalty damages (particularly favored by the infringers) is the familiar hypothetical negotiation between 'willing licensor and a willing licensee.'"
"The setting of a reasonable royalty after infringement cannot be treated, as it was here, as the equivalent of ordinary royalty negotiations among truly 'willing' patent owner and licensees. That view would constitute a pretense that the infringement never happened. It would also make an election to infringe a handy means for competitors to impose a 'compulsory license' policy upon ever patent owner."
"On the date a patent issues, a competitor which made no investment in research and development of the invention, has four options: (1) it can make and sell a noninfringing substitute product, and refrain from making, using, or selling a product incorporating the patented invention; (2) it can make and sell the patented product, if the patent owner be willing, negotiationg a license and paying a resonable (negotiated ) royalty; (3) it can simply take the invention, running the risk that litigation will ensue and that the patent will be found valid and infringed, ... Determination of a reasonable royalty, after election of option (3) , cannot, without injustice, be treated as though the infringer had elected option (2) in the first place."
"The infringer would have nothing to lose, and everything to gain if he could count on paying only the normal, routine royalty non-infringers might have paid. As said by this court in another context, the infringer would be in a "heads-I-win, tails-you-lose' postion."
###
The Micron stockholders still are under the belief that they are somehow going to get a better settlement with Rambus by filing a lawsuit.
First, if Micron loses lawsuit, Rambus doesn't have to even grant Micron a license to produce SDRAM, DDR, RDRAM or any products utilizing a Synchronous DRAM interface. (And enough RDRAM will be ramping up from Micron's competitors--we don't need them.)
Second, the judge can determine a "reasonable royalty" to be significantly higher than the standard royalty rate that Rambus has negoitated with others.
Third, the judge can order back payments of lost royalties based on the royalty rate determined above and then add interest charges to this amount.
Fourth, the judge can award attorney fees to Rambus.
And fifth, the judge can add up the above amounts and then triple this sum to award punitive damages due to willful patent infringement.
###
CLEARSTATION_10F2
EOM.
NEXT MESSAGE AS FOLLOWS:
swiftsolution.com
By: CLEARSTATION
Reply To: 9/20/2000 9:57:00 PM
Post #504 of 598
Hotlinks to Patent/Antitrust Law.
Updated list of easy reading sources of Patent/Antitrust Law.
"Patents-Legal Rights for Inventions," by the Intellectual Property Owners association located at ipo.org
"Patent Law," by Bitlaw located at bitlaw.com
"American Intellectual Property Law Association: An Overview of Intellectual Property" by the American Intellectual Propery Law Association located at aipla.org
Once at web site, click on link to PUBLICATIONS and then select from menu "WHAT IS A PATENT AND TRADEMARK."
"Guide to Model Patent Jury Instructions," by the American Intellectual Property Law Association located at address above.
Once at web site, click on link to PUBLICATIONS and then select "GUIDE TO MODEL PATENT JURY INSTRUCTIONS."
"Avoiding Patent, Trademark and Copyright Problems," by U.S. Small Business Administration located at sba.gov
"General Information about Patents," by Oppedahl & Larson LLP located at patents.com
Once there, you must read, "What royalty rate should I expect to receive for my patent?"
"An Antitrust Primer," by the Federal Trade Commisssion located at ftc.gov
"Antitrust Guidelines for Intellectual Property Licensing, by Fish & Richardson P.C. located at fr.com
Once at web site, scroll down to heading of LICENSING and then click on subject article.
"Proving Patent Damages to a Jury," by Fish & Richardson P.C. located at address above.
Once at web site, look for heading TRIALS and then click on subject article.
###
For specific legal references, try Cornell Law School web site at law.cornell.edu
Once there scroll down to bottom of page and type "PATENTS" inside of SEARCH BOX.
Next click on highlighted field "LII: LAW ABOUT...PATENTS. AN OVERVIEW OF PATENT LAW WITH LINKS TO KEY PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES..."
Next click on highlighted field of U.S. Code 35 U.S.C.
Suggest reading under Part III. PATENTS AND PROTECTION OF PATENT RIGHTS.
Ref: Chapter 28, Section 271 for INFRINGEMENT OF PATENTS.
Ref: Chapter 29, Sections 283, 284 and 285 for INJUNCTION, DAMAGES, and ATTORNEY FEES, respectively.
CLEARSTATION_10F2
Email this Post Format for Printing
Post New • Post Reply • Reply Later • Create Poll Problem Post • Recommend it!
View UnThreaded • Threaded Prev • Next
Fuel Cells, Mechanical Investing, Personal Finance
Learn more about them from the reports on Soapbox.com.
Stock Folders: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Ticker Board Author
Hey! Look at our Disclaimer.
112ms USVAWeb015 Fool Mission - Learning Together |
