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: Dave who wrote (79657)	11/9/2001 11:34:13 AM
From: dumbmoney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

The FTC seems to have come out hard against any form of finessing strategy where a company hides their supposed patents while engaging such a body. Please site evident that this is so.... I haven't seen any item stating this... If you have ever worked within a standards body, this type of "thing" happens all the time. Companies want the standard to most closely resemble their technology, so that the company can receive a nice return on their R&D and IP initiatives. You missed the point completely. When you join a standards body, you agree to various rules relating to patents: you must disclose your patent claims, you must license on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, etc. Strict adherence to such rules is essential for standards bodies to be able to function.

To: Dave who wrote (79657)	11/9/2001 12:01:47 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Dave, Not being a lawyer and not having even done the due dilligence of reading those patents, all I say is speculation, but the jury did draw a conclusion of fraud, I also recall that rmbs' testimony on the fraud portion of the trial was extremely damaging to the company --- even croakerfrog in yahoo has admitted this point. We could talk about whether IFX lawyers conceded that the patent with multiplex bus was in contention (they did) or whether they conceded the point on all bus (who knows, I wasn't there), but we won't get anywhere fast that way and neither of us will enjoy the journey. <g>. Actually, owning a patent grants a monopoly only in the sense that anyone wishing to use the technology has to pay a reasonable fee. The customer can choose NOT to use the technology. This is a monopoly on the specific technology invented. However, when it becomes a standard and then to come after the fact when huge sums have already been invested in manufacturing to produce the products in the standard, then it becomes an absolute monopoly in the industry, where there is no choice but to pay. But the applicability of the patents really is a moot point since the jury in the fraud portion of the trial did basically conclude that the patents were fraudulently obtained. A couple of legal miracle could reverse this, but someone who bats .065 is unlikely to suddenly turn around and bat .990 overnight. IE: this is a long shot of long shots. As for the FTC's interest in standards bodies, the article is pretty old, but here's a cached copy from google : Monday September 10, 12:53 am Eastern Time US said probing Sun Micro, others on patents WASHINGTON, Sept 10 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating Sun Microsystems Inc. (NasdaqNM:SUNW - news), Unocal Corp. (NYSE:UCL - news), and Rambus Inc. (NasdaqNM:RMBS - news) for whether they illegally kept patents secret while helping set industry standards, USA Today reported on Monday. The paper quoted sources familiar with the investigations as saying that the FTC was looking into whether the firms did not disclose patents or applications that later required companies to pay them royalties. The investigations signaled the FTC's growing interest in standard setting -- companies working together to set common specifications for products so they can easily be used with related equipment. ``This is an area whether there is a lot of impact on consumer welfare, and you can get a lot of bang for your buck,'' the paper quoted FTC antitrust chief Joseph Simons as saying. But it said he refused to discuss specific probes. USA Today said the FTC was investigating whether high-tech giant Sun failed to disclose patents while helping draft an industry standard for computer memory modules and afterward sought royalties from its rivals. In the case of energy company Unocal, the FTC was looking into its patent for clean-fuel formulations while helping draft new gasoline standards that the oil companies said virtually mandate Unocal's process. The FTC is also examining Rambus for pushing the computer industry to adopt a memory-chip standard while seeking patent rights to it. Chipmakers are expected to pay Rambus about $1 billion in royalties by the time they figure a way to design around Rambus' patents, USA Today said. It noted that all three companies had filed patent infringement lawsuits against firms they say owed them royalties. But the litigation backfired when those firms counter-sued, charging them with concealing their patents, and complained to the FTC. USA Today said the agency had confirmed it was investigating Unocal, but not that investigations were also under way of Rambus and Sun. Cached copy : google.com Original expired copy : biz.yahoo.com/rf/010910/n10252182_1.html news.cnet.com French (still valid copy) cf.biz.yahoo.com Some site may still have the original article. Regards, SbH