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: Zeev Hed who wrote (67861)	3/15/2001 8:04:51 PM
From: pompsander	Respond to of 93625

Zeev: This case reminds me of a labor relations guy I knew. The company he worked for kept trying to fire the same guy over and over again. Grievance, arbitration, he is put back to work. but the labor relations guy never got angry. Just looked for the next opportunity. Finally, the grievant employee asked: "Why doesnt' this bother you?". The HR guy responds: " You have to win every single grievance to keep your job. I only have to win one for you to lose it". RMBS only needs to prevail on one patent claim to have a claim on some royalties. The dramurai have to win every single claim.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (67861)	3/15/2001 8:28:15 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Zeev Hed; Re: "Carl, have you seen the 1990 patent? I have not and unless you have the file wrapper, you have not either. So how do you know whether the 1990 addressed only "multiplexed buses"" Zeev Hed, read the following: rambusite.com rambusite.com Next find where Rambus fails to deny the above here: rambusite.com rambusite.com Now, do you really think you need to read the file wrapper to know whether the 1990 filing addressed only multiplexed buses? Re: "furthermore, if the specification described, for instance an on chip register which operation was not dependent on a multiplex bus, those claims will survive (the fact that INFINEON "claim" they do not use a multiplex bus, a claim that can be easily challenged) and may apply to SDRAM and DDR DRAM." The on chip register bit was set through a value passed down the multiplex bus. Will that claim survive? I don't know, but these court cases are not going well for Rambus. Re "As for DDR there is still the issue of claims directed to "double clocking" which the multiplex bus issue does not relate to." If you read through the Markman filings listed above, you would know my answer to this. If you didn't read through it, go do it now and find out what the original filing said about those DDR clocks... -- Carl