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: mishedlo who wrote (56352)	10/3/2000 9:00:07 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 93625

Re: JEDEC in Rambus cross fire - link by: Watzman 10/2/00 7:17 pm Msg: 167240 of 167376 What a biased article (no shortage of those). First, according to ITCLYR, the patents granted in 1999 were word for word VERBATIM the same as those filed in 1990 (body of the patent, claims excluded). This kind of debunks the idea that Rambus got ideas from JEDEC and then patented them. There is a factual difference between the number of votes that Rambus says they participated in (one) and the number cited by the article (four). Previously, I've heard that Rambus joined JEDEC in 1993, not 1992. The Rambus patents were applied for in Europe, and the European agency publishes them, unlike the US patent office which keeps them secret. Thus they were in the public domain essentially the whole time covered by the article. Many, many of the JEDEC member were Rambus licensees and had licensed the patents (relative to RDRAM), thus, again, knew about them. There are a lot of other problems with it also. But in my mind, the bottom line is that Rambus never signed anything, and in the absence of a written agreement, property rights to a patent simply are not given up. I don't think that this is either an accurate depiction of the events themselves, or a story that will hold much water in court. Posted as a reply to: Msg 167229 by yunhuiwei