Comments on: Rambus drops some patent claims against Nvidia

It asks the International Trade Commission to terminate a probe of Nvidia relating to four patents in an ongoing case.

[Steve_Jmontim]

Brooke,

When you post an article that only tells a lopsided version of the story, you just look like a ridiculous mouthpiece for a biased article.

Rambus does not have a checkered track record on lawsuits. They have won in every venue that has completed. The Judge Robinson decision that you cite is being appealed, and will be compared to Judge Whyte's spoliation decision, where using the same evidence he found that Rambus did not commit spoliation. In fact, much of Judge Robinson's decision cited missing documents that Rambus in a reply proved HAD been submitted. And further, that documents that Micron used as examples of documents that Rambus had destroyed and that were obtained from other sources were actually provided by Rambus themselves.

In short, Judge Robinson issued a a draconian solution ruling Rambus' patents unenforecable with a decision that doesn't even pass the initial laugh test. Conicidentally, two days later she is announced as a featured speaker at the FTC's conference.

The FTC recently dropped their case against Rambus after the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Remember it was the FTC case where the FTC's own Chief ALJ ruled that the case against Rambus should be dropped, and that the evidence showed Rambus did nothing wrong in JEDEC.

Contrast that with your statement about the EU, which completely ignores the FTC rulings and results which are based on the very same evidence and facts. What do you think will happen with the EU ruling?

You failed to mention the Antitrust trial which starts in less than three months, with potential damages in the billions of dollars. There is a pulitzer prize waiting for the journalist who actually writes the full story. But I guess it won't be you, because you need to sell ad space.

[fgwgner]

Hay Steve_Jmontim or who ever you are stop acting as a spokesman for Rambus just joined today ha kind of fishy to me. And by the way about ethics you should put in your post that you are affiliated with Rambus

[Steve_Jmontim]

I'm not affiliated with Rambus in any way other than as a stockholder. But during the many years of owning this stock I've followed all of the cases, and read every publically available brief and decision. I don;t just read what the electronic media has to say, which no surprise, is usually less than half of the real story.

You may not like it, but Rambus is a company that is far ahead of it's time. It's biggest problem that it is run by people, but it has some darn smart engineers. In the early '90's they figured out how to make DRAM run synchronously at a speed 15 times faster than the current standard. the big problem was, computers didn't really need that speed until the late 1990's. In the meantime Rambus has been developing Flexphase to allow for different circuit board trace lengths and numerous other inventions that the industry is just getting around to realizing that they need.

And Rambus is already there. The biggest antitrust trial in history starts in less than 4 months, and the electronic media has ignored it. While Rambus was inventing, the DRAM manufacturers were trying to put Rambus out of business by keeping RDRAM prices high, and selling SDRAM and DDR below cost. They were telling Intel they were committed to ramping RDRAM production because Dell Compaq and HP were all clamoring for more RDRAM to meet demand. But at the same time, the manufacturers were putting out news snippets that RDRAM was too expensive, too hard to make etc. In the case of one manufacturer, they even bought a profitable plant from a competitor producing RDRAM and then promptly shut it down.

Keep your eyes open, you ain;t seen nothing yet. Rambus isn't the bad guys.

[rickster2515]

I think that the article could use facts from both sides of this legal tussle. It does seem to be biased.