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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: freeus who wrote (21473)	12/1/2000 5:51:10 PM
From: Voltaire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Here it is, straight from the tractor. vster looking for a harvest To: Don Green who wrote (62098) From: blake_paterson Thursday, Nov 30, 2000 5:14 PM ET Reply # of 62170 CC notes courtesy B Watzman on Yahoo: What follows is MY notes Harmon ... Usual CYA forward looking disclosures Tate 2 topics - RDRAM outlook & Litigation Many misconceptions in trade press Much FUD (HIS TERM !) by parties that feel threatened (HIS WORDS) Countering FUD w/facts FUD view, failed tech w/no future Their view, solidly established with great future Nearly 100 RDRAM based systems, 75% wkstation mkt MAJOR FUD, Intel dropping RDRAM FUD based on Barrets performance NOT TRUE. Intel's only concern is cost of RDRAM RDRAM is still tech of CHOICE RDRAM will be THE dominant technology by 2003 Price premium must be reduced, which will come w/increasing production FUD: Production issues, no demand [He's hitting on Micron as a "follower, not a leader, boosting Samsung, Toshiba as leaders] Samsung will have only 10% die size penalty Cost premium will under 20% by 3Q2001 Now he's attacking DDR ... Milestone after Milestone missed Why the delays .... MAJOR system stability problems with DDR He's attacking the JEDEC standard for DDR, and also the contention that DDR also will have no price premium. Rambus expects DDR to have significant price premium. However, DDR may be adequate for some systems for some [short] time. Moving to Litigation ..... Litigation .... commenting on Barrets comments on "toll collecting" Justifying Rambus demand for royalties. Patent in 1990 so large that Patent office DEMANDED that it be split into multiple patents, many not issued until 1999. Been licensing since 1990. Licenses did NOT permit use for NON-RDRAM applications. Rambus did NOT invent SDRAM or DDR, but things essential to SDRAM and DDR ARE covered by the patents. Samsung, Toshiba and NEC, plus Elpida [the leaders] understand the situation. Attacking Hyundai, Infineon and MU as followers. Over 100 patents, 11 of which are currently asserted in the legal actions. Only need ONE to be upheld to prevail. US is primary venue for action, BUT downside is YEARS to trial. So filing in Germany, for QUICK trial. Trial has only 3 written responses, complaint, response, response to response. Also, European courts will order confiscation of materials. Court in Italy has ALREADY ordered confiscation and has ALREADY ruled in Rambus' favor in 1st hearing, 2nd hearing in April 2001. Seizure has also already occured in France. [My impression is that seizures are of documents, not products]. Rambus notified by European PTO that an additional European patent is coming. Infineon countersuit has no relevance to Rambus patents, rather to DRAM core. IFX, MU and Hyundai resorting to weak arguments, nothing improper. Attacking Jack Robertson directly now, but not by name. There has been NO FTC action against Rambus as alleged by Jack Robertson. He's hinting at complete shutdown of IFX, MU and Hyundai, not very subtle, comments about the boards wisdom in failing to settle. End of prepared remarks, now Q&A