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: Bilow who wrote (69098)	3/25/2001 4:00:02 PM
From: The Prophet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

No it's not. Validity has to do primarily with whether there was prior art, etc. The judge's Markman ruling implicates the infringement arguments, i.e., whether the language of the valid RMBS claims establishes that the patents were infringed or not. Zeev has been trying to explain this to you for some time. He also politely pointed out that your concession that the claims clearly cover SDRAM. In my view, this confirms that the court's Markman construction was erroneous.