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: pompsander who wrote (66595)	2/26/2001 2:30:46 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Pomp, The litigants are complaining that Rambus learned of JEDEC plans in the meetings, and shaped their IP strategy around those plans. After SDRAM became a standard, Rambus amended their patents and demanded royalties. You don't see a problem with that? Scumbria

To: pompsander who wrote (66595)	2/26/2001 3:48:30 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

pomp, "But did JEDEC suspect they were on thin ice? Did they have reason,any reason at all, to think they were or would be infringing? If so, did they inquire??" Yes they did. Mr. Crisp, a representative of Rambus at JEDEC meetings, hinted in hallway talks that there might be IP issues, but he intentionally stated that this was "his personal opinion", apparently trying to walk the edge. Rambus, accordingly, never claimed officially that the SDRAM and SLDRAM proposals are infringing any Rambus patents. And they were officially asked about this during JEDEC meetings. "Sorry to be dense, but what am I missing here? Where is the established bad practice by Rambus?" No need to be sorry. Just carefully read on all materials presented at docket72: rambusite.com Good insights into fraudulent way of Rambus thinking.