Mike Magee... Why don't you write about the assh*les we longs have to put up with on SI...
Message 15670618
To:Ian Stromberg who started this subject
From: Bilow
Monday, Apr 16, 2001 9:01 PM
View Replies (5) | Respond to of 70344
Hi all; ABA article on Rambus lawsuits:
Rambus Legal Expenses Ramping to Meet Growing Demand
American Bar Association, Newsletter, April 14, 2001
The American Bar Association announced that Rambus' three United States lawsuits, Rambus v. Infineon,
Micron v. Rambus and Hyundai v. Rambus, are increasing legal income significantly for several U.S. law
firms. The lucky lawyers, winners in the "shark-like" competition for representing the soon to be victorious
memory manufacturers, are looking forward to taking a substantial percentage of the RICO tripled
damages to be awarded. While legal rumors have that some of the junior members at Kirkland & Ellis are
already looking at possible improvements in their housing and automobile situations, the official word from
the law firms is that "it ain't over till it's over". But strictly off the record, a legal secretary at
McGuireWoods LLP noted that at least two full partners are so sure of a big payout that they are already
"hanging around bars looking for trophy wives".
Emotions are running in the opposite direction at Rambus' attorneys. Christian & Barton, LLP is said to be
asking to be paid well in advance due to fears that their legal bills will be unable to be paid by the soon to
be bankrupt IP firm. Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich is said to be looking for their own legal help to
represent them against Rambus, while Rowland Braxton Hill sent out a memo demanding that lawyers who
had been attempting to shirk Rambus duty be more supportive of the company's clients, even if they are
"white collar career criminals with no ethics whatsoever".
While other patent litigation has generated income for lawyers for years, the Rambus case is expected to
not dwell for long on patent infringement. Instead, the suits are expected to immediately zero in on the
question of what damages Rambus owes for their fraudulent conduct at JEDEC. Since Judge Thomas
Payne, presiding over the Rambus v. Infineon case, made a Markman ruling completely in favor of the
memory makers, legal interest in the case has been focused on the RICO charges. Negotiations between the
legal talent and Infineon on how to split the triple damages are complete, but no one seems to be
complaining. Richards, Layton & Finger, who are representing Micron won't say what their deal is, but if
the smiles are any indication, they intend on working their case for all it's worth. Micron appears to be
undertaking an attempt to generate as expensive a case as possible, with more than 200 docket entries and
no trial in sight, so as to cause the triple damages to amount to as large a bill for Rambus as possible.
Rambus has been assisting in the exponential growth in mounting legal fees by delaying the cases as much
as possible. In addition, Rambus sued the same companies in several foreign countries. One British barrister
said that the case, "including all the various complications in Europe, is likely to exceed Jarndyce v.
Jarndyce in total legal fees." His only complaint was that the legal issues were too simple for a true
multi-century case of the sort that creates sinecures for entire branches of government.
The first suit to come to trial is Rambus v. Infineon, expected in late May. Only three cases are currently on
file in the United States, but more are expected to be filed against Rambus by the eight memory makers
that signed to pay royalties on SDRAM and DDR to Rambus over the last year. Those companies, Fujitsu,
NEC, Elpida, Hitachi, Matsushita, Mitsubishi, Samsung and Toshiba, will file for triple damages against
Rambus once the company loses the right to demand royalties on SDRAM in the Infineon case. Elpida is
said to be "chomping at the bit", having even issued a press release noting that royalties needed to be
renegotiated.
abanet.org
-- Carl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message 15670844
To:denni rash who wrote (70304)
From: Bilow
Monday, Apr 16, 2001 9:51 PM
View Replies (2) | Respond to of 70345
Hi denni rash; Of course it's BS. Of course I wrote it. I thought it would be clear from the content, but one of my
EE buddies thought it was too well done, so I guess I have to come out and state it publicly.
The "ABA article on Rambus lawsuits" is a fake, a parody. I hope you all had a laugh.
Personally, I thought it was a hoot, and that I included enough obvious spoofery that it would be realized by all to
be such, in addition to the obvious fact that the ABA doesn't run around commenting on lawsuits. But I must have
hit enough of the real world for it to not be totally obvious to all.
Spoofery examples:
"hanging around bars looking for trophy wives."
"attempting to shirk Rambus duty even if they are 'white collar career criminals with no ethics
whatsoever'""
"Jarndyce v. Jarndyce in legal fees ... creates sinecures for entire branches of government"
-- Carl |
