To: Dave B who wrote (77536 ) 8/16/2001 2:21:24 AM From: Bilow Respond to Hi Dave B; Re: "Again, there was a lot of animosity and so on directed at Rambus before they went after the SDRAM and DDR royalties, so that's not the issue. " This is true. Rambus' management was always incompetent, no one is trying to say that going after SDRAM and DDR was their first error. My issue is that Rambus' management used sleazy business tactics and had lousy technology long before they went after SDRAM and DDR royalties As for trading patents, sure it's a great idea, but are you saying that only those in the "industry" are allowed to come up with ideas that affect the industry? " No, unfortunately. What you are illustrating (and Rambus' actions illustrate as well), is that in the modern world, IP is the soft underbelly of technology. But we never got to find out what Rambus' IP would have been judged, in a court of law, to be worth. The bears have many times noted that 10s of thousands of patents apply to DRAM, so Rambus' share of these is minuscule. Sure we've got statements from SI experts that Rambus can legally charge whatever they want for their IP, but hey, every one of the "experts" who said that was dead wrong on the results of the Virginia case, both the infringement and the fraud. QCOM's IP is more like SDRAM, if you want to play, you have to use it, and of course that is exactly why Rambus tried to patent SDRAM. But over the next few days / weeks, Wall Street is gonna figure out that Samsung is ramping down on RDRAM, I think it would be a good idea to not be holding RMBS when they do.
