Ron Schenone

Rambus – A Story Of David vs Goliath – Trial Set For Jan. 11th

Posted by on Jan 2, 2010 | 5 Comments

Back in 1990, Rambus developed what they stated was a new type of DRAM memory chip, which the company hoped would appeal to those seeking memory that could keep up with faster processors. Unfortunately the memory never had a chance to prove itself, since it appears that the company could of been the victim of illegal activities by other chip makers. The company claims that South Korean-based Samsung Electronics and Hynix Semiconductor, as well as Micron Technology of Idaho all conspired to sabotage the Rambus company, causing the company to lose countless Billions of dollars.

In a recent news article it also stated that:

Incorporated in 1990, Rambus developed a new technology for dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, chips, which provide high-speed storage and retrieval of data from personal computers and other gadgets. Rambus claims its design enabled the chips to keep up with the increasing speed of advanced microprocessors, which serve as the brains of personal computers. And it persuaded a number of chip makers to license its technology in the 1990s.

But then, the company alleges, Hynix, Samsung and Micron — which were pushing an alternative DRAM design they believed would yield them more profit — tried to make Rambus’ version unattractive to computer makers by conspiring to limit the supply and boost the price of chips based on Rambus’ architecture.

And there was this:

If Rambus wins, it could reap up to $12.9 billion in damages.

It makes one wonder how the courts will rule on this one. Some critics claim that Rambus is crying foul because they couldn’t compete in the memory market. I do recall when Rambus was being used that the prices for were almost double of other RAM.

Comments welcome.

Source.

  • Regatta De Blanc

    “Hynix, Samsung and Micron — which were pushing an alternative DRAM design they believed would yield them more profit”

    The so called “alternative DRAM design” a.k.a known as SDRAM and DDR were laden with Rambus IP that was wantonly cherry picked by the DRAM manufacturers, so not only did these same manufacturers try and succeed to boycott RDRAM out of the market, they willfully infringed upon Rambus’ IP in order to enable their “alternative DRAM design” .

    Rambus was denied the opportunity to compete in the market place by this colossal, multi front, global conspiracy.

    The criminally convicted DRAM cartel is sweating bullets already.

  • Barry Watzman

    Re: “I do recall when Rambus was being used that the prices for were almost double of other RAM.”

    Almost double? Hardly. It was priced EIGHT TIMES (800%) more than SDRAM in the 2001 timeframe.

    Not because it cost that much to make; according to Samsung (at the time) the COST was 15%-20% more (to make). But the selling price … was 800% more.

    Which we now know was due to collusion, and a conspiracy of illegal anti-trust acts.

  • Mikey

    Rambus does not make any chips so Rambus does not compete with the cartel members.

    By the way, Jedec stole Rambus’s IP and cherry picked 4 important features to make competiting chips like sdram and DDR and DDR2 and even DDR3 and so forth.

    That was why the memory makers have been fighting Rambus for 10 or more years but Hynix lost their first infringement trial which was cut into 3 phases and all 3 were lost to Rambus.

    Rambus won big but is appealing a spoliation ruling from Delaware which the corrupt Judge ruled the patents are void. That penalty would be too harsh because if there were no concrete evidence or conflict in two court judges rulings then this makes such a remedy of voiding patents means it will be overturned.

    The patents will have the rights to collect and I think the recently validaition of the EU agency agreement with Rambus for lowering the royalty rates will be the foundation for new licenses.

    Looks like the end is near for all these litigation matters by mid 2010. As to this price fixing trial, I can say one thing – it is almost impossible to defend for the actions of the cartel. This is why their delay tactics was the only way to defend themselves and continue to try to starve Rambus which is consider tiny to their death of the company.

    By the way, that was one of the original plans to deal with Rambus way back in 1991-1992 when Rambus invented faster memory technology. That was why slow EDO drams was replaced with SDRAM. SDRAM was copied from rambus invention as well early on.

    People should be grateful for Rambus to have invented faster memory technology but they never paid rambus a dine except a few who signed licenses like Sony, Toshiba and now even IBM is paying. AMD also. Intel saved Rambus from the dead.

  • gary bing

    I bought RAMBUS in 2001 one because of it’s perceived association with INTEL. I had no problem with the Samsung brand and I simply thought that Kingston and Crucial were overpriced at the time. When the new DDram came out I had the feeling I was had. I know have DDR3. My RAMBUS I understand was quite valuable, but PC Club recycled my old computer without telling me shortly before they went out. I believe RAMBUS got reamed and the thieves need to be taken to task.

  • http://wp3.lockergnome.com/nexus/blade/ Ron Schenone

    Hi Gary,
    Thanks for sharing your experince this with us.