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: jim kelley who wrote (56841)	10/6/2000 5:03:22 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

I'm not a lawyer, praise be, but from what I can tell the Norther District of California automatically orders cases like Hyundai/Rambus into Alternate Dispute Resolution. Hyundai is trying to opt out of arbitration. What I can't tell is what the last entry means. 10/2/00 8 CLERK'S NOTICE for reassignment to U.S. District Judge [5:00-cv-20905] (mmr) [Entry date 10/03/00] It appears that it may have been ordered into court??? The above Thanks to USJeff on the FOOL

To: jim kelley who wrote (56841)	10/6/2000 5:05:42 PM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 93625

On failure to state a claim Thanks to USJEFF chrononhotonthologos.com

To: jim kelley who wrote (56841)	10/6/2000 5:07:51 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hyundai ordered into arbitration? Thanks to USjeff I'm not a lawyer, praise be, but from what I can tell the Norther District of California automatically orders cases like Hyundai/Rambus into Alternate Dispute Resolution. Hyundai is trying to opt out of arbitration. What I can't tell is what the last entry means. 10/2/00 8 CLERK'S NOTICE for reassignment to U.S. District Judge [5:00-cv-20905] (mmr) [Entry date 10/03/00] It appears that it may have been ordered into court???

To: jim kelley who wrote (56841)	10/6/2000 5:26:52 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Intergralaction by: ptnewell 10/6/00 3:45 pm Msg: 169024 of 169047 Lawsuits are filed and fought for many reasons. Of course one has to allege something, and it is best to make it sound frightening to the other side. I suspect Micron, Hyundai, and Infineon were hoping to bleed Rambus with multiple suits to the point where they would accept a lesser deal. Besides, all 3 fought TXN (Texas Instruments) for years, and lost. But I think they will find that Rambus doesn't play as nice as TI did. RMBS is trying to make it clear that they will play a much harder game. The game the Dramurai are used to is "tails I win, heads we draw." The result of losing isn't much worse than just signing a license agreement to begin with. But it looks like Rambus has made it clear that it has several ways of upping the severity of this strategy of automatically fighting royalties. I hope RMBS sticks to its stated rule of shutting down adjudicated infringers.

To: jim kelley who wrote (56841)	10/7/2000 12:05:55 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Re: Infineon patent claims from an earlier time would have to read on top of Rambus' patent claims in order for there to be precedence on the part of Infineon. This is extremely unlikely because RDRAM is a radical departure from the earlier DRAM. We will have to wait to see the particulars. Trouble is, Rambus claimed that patents in the context of RDRAM also apply to earlier DRAM. Infineon said, "OK, have it your way, but then we are applying our patent claims made in the context of earlier DRAM to RDRAM." What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and it looks like Rambus's goose has just been cooked. What's Rambus stock worth if its IP is invalidated? There should be some cash on hand, prepaid rents, office furniture, and other odds and ends, isn't there? Does 10 cents a share sound about right? Dan