SI
SI
discoversearch

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: pompsander who wrote (65840)2/12/2001 8:59:37 PM
From: andy kelly  Respond to of 93625
 
Pomp, and thread

If a court finds the JEDEC non-disclosure argument persuasive, do you think this then would also be extended to DDR, or would Rambus still have a case for DDR?

thanks, andy



To: pompsander who wrote (65840)2/12/2001 11:31:02 PM
From: jim kelley  Respond to of 93625
 
In order to make the JEDEC argument work, Mu has to tell the court and Rambus which patent claims are infringed by Sdram and DDR. When they do that they will be admitting infringement.

If the the court finds that Rambus complied with its duties while a member of JEDEC then logically Mu loses the infringement case. So Mu's only hope is the JEDEC "bad boy" argument which is very weak.

I think the judge is setting Mu up for a big fall.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News