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: jim kelley who wrote (72617)	5/11/2001 7:47:34 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Jim Unless there is a clause in their contracts with their licensees Rambus will not have to repay any Sdram royalties. You simply have this wrong. I was wondering about that. That's the caveat emptor thing. Remember that there were two counts of fraud in there that they were found guilty of. It's the actual fraud that is the problem (see below) Trial Verdict Just In... May 9th It appears that the jury in the Rambus vs. Infineon trial have ruled in favor of Infineon on Count 10 Actual Fraud and Count 11 Constructive Fraud. On Count 14 RICO the jury ruled in favor of Rambus. Punitive damages of $3.5 M was awarded to Infineon which the court capped at $350,000. fredhager.com If the contracts were entered into where one party actually knew that they did not actually obtain the patents legally, does that mean the contract was negotiated in bad faith (fraudulently)? If so, does that create grounds for recovery of payments? Unless the actual fraud conviction is overturned, I doubt if rmbs will walk out of this intact. But of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong when I thought the SDR/DDR patents are a slam dunk, and that the entire PC industry was screwed for years to come. SbH

To: jim kelley who wrote (72617)	5/11/2001 7:57:22 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi jim kelley; Re: "Unless there is a clause in their contracts with their licensees Rambus will not have to repay any Sdram royalties. You simply have this wrong." BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I'm sorry, but this is just too much. Let's go over this again... (1) A US judge in a civil case rules that Infineon showed a prima facie case for *FRAUD* by Rambus. (2) Rambus appeales, but a team of 3 US appeals court judges agree with the prima facie *FRAUD* ruling, and Rambus loses their attorney - client priviledge based on the *CRIME - FRAUD* exception. (3) At trial, a jury of 7 American citizens not only agree that the actions of Rambus constituted *FRAUD, but in addition, vote that Rambus should pay $3.5 million dollars in punitive damage to a foreign company. (LOL!!!) And after these three different groups of disinterested people all come to the same conclusion, you think that Rambus' hands are clean? And you think that Rambus is going to get to keep the money they FRAUDULENTLY* obtained? BWAHAHAHAHA!!! This is so difficult to believe that I can see that it could become the founding doctrine of a cult that will eventually grow into a world-wide religion. Management should consider themselves lucky if the government (FBI?) hasn't already opened a *CRIMINAL* investigation for *FRAUD*. -- Carl

To: jim kelley who wrote (72617)	5/11/2001 11:27:12 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Jimbo, RE:"Unless there is a clause in their contracts with their licensees Rambus will not have to repay any Sdram royalties. You simply have this wrong." How much in royalties on SDRAM or DDR has Rambus recieved and from whom? As far as paying back the money...2 possibilities... 1. There is a clause where, based the patents being fraud, they have to pay it back. --a. Rambus pays it back --b. Rambus refuses to pay it back ----i. Rambus gets sued ----ii. Company decides it's not worth it to sue. 2. There is a clause where Rambus doesn't have to pay it back... ----a. Company sues ----b. company doesn't sue because they figure it's not worth it. Either way...Rambus gets no more SDRAM royalities...or DDR. Jim