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: Tony Viola who wrote (71498)	5/1/2001 9:42:26 PM
From: Don Green	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Judge tosses all but three claims in Rambus-Infineon suit By Reuters May 1, 2001 (4:47 PM) URL: /story/OEG20010501S0112 RICHMOND, Va. — A federal judge has tossed out all but three claims in a patent infringement case brought by Rambus Inc., which designs and licenses computer memory, against German semiconductor maker Infineon Technologies AG, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported Tuesday (May 1). U.S. District Judge Robert Payne, who is presiding over the ongoing jury trial here, also will consider a motion by Infineon to throw out all the remaining claims after receiving legal briefs from the litigants. Rambus sued Infineon for allegedly infringing on its patents on two types of computer memory. The original suit included 57 claims covering four patents. Infineon, one of the top global producers of computer memory, countered that Rambus improperly obtained technical specifications that led to some of the patents and was seeking to broaden the scope of its patents in the suit. In tossing out the bulk of Rambus' case, the judge dismissed a key charge of willful infringement against Infineon. Rambus had alleged Infineon knew it was infringing on computer memory designs invented by Rambus more than seven years ago.

To: Tony Viola who wrote (71498)	5/1/2001 9:54:10 PM
From: Doug M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Tony, from what I understand Rambus is burdened with the Markman ruling which classifies the bus as a multiplexed set of signal lines. IFX is claiming the SDRAM bus isn't multiplexed at all. Rambus, in this case, is trying to prove that it is multiplexed at least temporarily during initialization. RMBS isn't claiming they invented multiplexing. Doug

To: Tony Viola who wrote (71498)	5/1/2001 10:12:02 PM
From: ekid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Tony, have you been out of town ? Who's saying rambus is claiming multiplexing ? it's only that the judge decided that rambus inventions/claims are only enforcebale when used with a multiplex bus. and our local inventor thinks that that might be the case of SDRAM.

To: Tony Viola who wrote (71498)	5/2/2001 12:28:23 AM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

You are out of touch Tony. Rambus claimed no such thing. The multiplex bus issue is a contrived distinction made by the judge and Infineon.

To: Tony Viola who wrote (71498)	5/2/2001 4:25:20 AM
From: John Walliker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

Tony, So now Rambus is claiming they invented multiplexing? That was in use before even Intel was. Obviously I'm missing something, shouldn't do drive-by posts. You are missing something. Rambus never claimed to have invented multiplexing. The problem is that their claims were made in relation to a preferred implementation which used a multiplexed bus. The judge has ruled that their claims are ONLY valid in conjunction with a multiplexed bus. SDRAM multiplexes some of the address lines at initialisation to configure the output delay register. Therefore SDRAM uses a multiplexed bus. However, Carl (Bilow) has argued that the individual parts of the bus should be treated separately, so he claims SDRAM is not multiplexed because the data lines only carry data. He does not disagree that the address bus in SDRAM carries configuration data. I argue that because a data bus is useless without address and control lines the bus must be treated as a whole, in which case SDRAM is definitely multiplexed. (This discussion happened a few weeks ago.) John