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: Jdaasoc who wrote (77581)	8/16/2001 11:07:32 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Jdaasoc; Actually, the original Rambus patent of 1990 doesn't cover any modern RDRAM at all. This shouldn't be a surprise to you. Modern RDRAM was designed in 1996, why would Rambus have been able to file a patent that would cover it in 1990? That would require psychic abilities. -- Carl

To: Jdaasoc who wrote (77581)	8/17/2001 1:44:46 AM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 93625

Under the logic of Payne Markman which indirectly led to last remaining outstanding fraud conviction, RMBS 4i RDRAM doesn't infringe on its own patents. <LOL>. One of its main features is separate control and data bus --pg 1. It may take a while but Infineon ruling will eventually be reversed. It's sorry for Micron and Hynix didn't they didn't get to go first since disproven DDR JEDEC defense and wacko Markman decided by technical amatuer Judge Payne will not happen in their cases. Jdaasoc, Can you walk me through the RMBS proposed definition of the "multiplexed bus" claim terminology and explain to me why it would not read on all pre-1990 DRAM types as well as post 1990 DRAM types? Again I'm not talking about the entire patent, or even any one claim in its entirety. Just their explanation of what a "multiplexed bus" consists of. As I understood their explanation, the definition would have covered any and all bus designs ever made to connect to any multi-celled memory IC. ...And remember you are talking to a Mom & Pop of at least the 3rd Degree here. The reason I ask is because from the very earliest "Pop Sci" descriptions of The Bus (long before it became a public company or grabbed INTC by the short and curlies) I can only recall it being described as a wiz bang design, unique for its specific ability to pump data over two pins at warp factor 9. Now, flash forward to 2001 and its transmogrified into a bus for all seasons. Multiplexing here, duoplexing, uniplexing there. In fact, now they say this isn't a wiz bang bus design at all! Its a whole "system" for doing really fast stuff on any bus at all! And if you have stuff that does it really fast, ...well, that "stuff" must be ours! Hopefully the entire history of exchanges between the patent examiner and the boys from Los Altos will be laid bare one day. But my guess is that it would make the PTO look particularly incompetent and that it will never see the light of day. ...Much like RMBS ever collecting royalties from IFX. ...Whether Payne's Markman ruling were overturned or not. ...Which it won't be. ...Mainly because the behavior of this organization is just not worth turning an entire world industry on its head. 0\|0