Slashdot Mirror
Rambus Slammed For 'Judge Shopping'
Lawrence Person writes: "Acoording to this story on Semiconductor Business News, International Trade Comission Judge Administrative Law Judge Sidney Harris reprimanded Rambus for "blatant judge shopping" in response to Rambus withdrawing its suit against Hyundai after Harris, known as a tough judge, was assigned to the case. Harris also ruled "that if Rambus in the future ever filed a new synchronous patent infringement case against Hyundai, or even any other firm, such a petition must be assigned to his court if he is able to hear it.""
Rambus was given the opportunity to defend why they withdrew their case so quickly after the judge in question was assigned. If the judge acts too biased during the case, he gives Rambus all sort of lead way to appeal. I think it is fitting that he hear the next case. If Rambus really wasn't judge shopping, they shouldn't care. I would agree that what the judge said seemed a little biased if Rambus didn't have a chance to explain why they withdrew the case. Pressing charges like that and then withdrawing them and wanting to sue later is just wrong, and that kind of action is what is causing all the focus on frivolous law suits these days.
What does the fact that people actually shop for judges (for a good reason) say about the justice system? Shouldn't all judges deal out the same punishment for similar crimes? Shouldn't they all be equal? Justice is blind but she sure can smell that money being wafted under her nose.
[ ]
These kind of tactics are typical of rambus. They know and intel know that, right now, the technology if the RIMM's ( sux to get rimmed by rambus:) ) is inferior to SDRAM's technology. Now rambus's only way of making money is to sue for more money..
Rambus is an IP only company. its kind of a smart way to do things cuz they could have a small lab for their physicists (sic?) and a small office for theyr ceo's. they have almost no overhead. If they win any suits for licence fee's thats just more money to them and all they have to do is sit there and collect it. all they have to pay for is lawyers.
Now that intel wants to ditch them they are under more pressure to have their income assured with these licencing fees. Too bad for them they ran acrosss Harris, especially now that they seemd to have pissed him off.
It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
RAMBUS would be better off doing some engineer-shopping to develop a truely competetive product to DDR-SDRAM.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
This rule has been violated by Microsoft, Napster, and now Rambus. In Microsoft's case, it was doing such things as creating a video that was later conceded to be a stitched-together fake. In Napster's case, it was the remarkably two-faced performance of its executives on copyrights, and also the company's lack of a plan for making money ("What kind of a business is this?", one can imagine Ms. Patel saying). And now it's Rambus's turn to displease a judge by backing out exactly when one was assigned to its case.
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
No person would reasonably be able and permitted to do what Rambus has set out to do: hold an industry hostage by use of the courts as a weapon. Since Rambus, a corporation, is not only capable of doing this but has the fixed intent of using the legal system for vengeance instead of justice (not even vengeance really: for self-interested gain), it stands to reason that the judge will act in the interests of justice.
I only hope it contributes to a growing realisation that corporations are not individuals, are not remotely on a level with individuals in power and influence, and should be disenfranchised before they end up allowed to practice law themselves, and finally compete with humans to become judges. Is that what you meant when you said a corporation is the same as an individual and entitled to the same rights?
It might seem entertaining to picture Judge Hyundai stomping on Rambus, until you think about what Judge Microsoft, Judge Firestone, and Judge RIAA would be up to.
Corporations are legal fictions made up out of the rules of the game. UNMAKE THEM!
You're wrong to say RDRAM technology is inferior. It isn't. It's just that the rest of technology hasn't caught up with it yet AND it's advantage isn't worth the price. But make no mistake - DDR is just a stop gap measure. As chip speeds continue to rise, there will have to be change in memory technology. Whether that is RDRAM or not remains to be seen. But please, know what your talking about before you make statements.
The Game Guy
Actually, according to the article you reference, it was Bush Attorney Barry Richard who made the "the [state] Supreme Court has no jurisdiction" quote, not Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris.
----
----
Open mind, insert foot.
Of course, they say this now after their failed technical and marketing attempts with RAMBUS technology. Intel lost alot of face. Of course, if those things hadn't happened to Intel, Intel would probably singing psalms to Rambus.
"Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"
Well, the case was filed with an ITC administrative judge. That is NOT a real court. So, they can refile in a real court, and get a real judge. Sorry. IAL. Thalia
FYI, the actual patent is for a valid memory read/write occuring on either the leading or trailing edge of a timing cycle. Hence "dual" data rate - you can R/W twice every clock instead of once.
Most people will realize that this does not exactly double the rate but it does help a whole lot.
> Judge Sidney Harris reprimanded Rambus for "blatant judge shopping"
Maybe they should get together with Katherine "the [state] Supreme Court has no jurisdiction" Harris, and compare notes about what does and doesn't work when shopping around for a sympathetic judge.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardwarecentral/rev iews/1787/2/?ShowPollResults90=Yes
This pretty much shows all the tech behind why it's not inferior. And please don't fire back at me about RamBus - I think they _SUCK_ and should be put out of business. But don't smack down the technology - it's the company that has the problem.
The Game Guy
The patent is still bogus (though I'm sure you probably already knew that). ASIC designers have been using both edges of a clock for quite a loooonnnng time. Is Rambus now going to sue ASIC houses as well? Why is using posedge and negedge clocks in SDRAM any more trivial than using them in an ASIC? I certainly don't know of any patents filed for ASICs using both clocks. Or microprocessors for that matter. Or PALs, or FPGAs, or organgutans, or breakfast cereals, or lima bean...
It's just a ridiculous patent (shock - a stupid patent passed by the USPTO!) from a ridiculous company.
I just heard that this Florida thing is now being referred to as "Hurricane Chad". Sheesh.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
judge judy never steps down to corperations
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I interpret this as Harris has forbidden Rambus from screwing with any other SDRAM producers as well. This would be a good thing for all of us DDR-SDRAM fans who dont want to pay sky-high prices for it.
---
Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of theese?
Can you imagine a MOSIX cluster of these?
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
We just need a few hi-profile IP companies smacked into place before real patent reform is considered.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Rambus did what any patentee who cares about its patents would do when informed that Judge Harris would be hearing the case: it exercised its absolute right to withdraw the complaint. 19 CFR 210.10(a)(5)(i) says "The complainant may withdraw the complaint AS A MATTER OF RIGHT at ANY TIME before the Commission votes on whether to institute an investigation." (emphasis added).
Rambus was well within its rights, and I would counsel any client of mine who was the patentee to do the same. Any client who was a defendent before Judge Harris I would advise to cheer loudly.
A few facts on Judge Harris:
1) He is NOT an "article 3" federal judge like a District Court Judge. He's an employee of the ITC who has been hired to act as an "administrative law judge." His rulings are appealed to the full Commission, not to federal court. Only the Commission's decision is appealed to Federal Court.
2) Judge Harris' overriding characteristic is an extreme hostility to patents. I've been before him a number of times and he has upheld a patent precisely once.
3) So extreme is his hostility to patents that he once "sua sponte" struck down a patent as invalid, even when the defendant had not even asserted the patent was invalid. When this decision reached the Federal Circuit, he was summarily reversed, and has since acquired the nickname "Sua Sponte Sid."
4) He's advancing in years and mercifully will retire soon.
5) The decision being quoted here is a classic illustration of just how bad he is, since he has no authority whatsoever to inquire into the motives of a complainant. Remember also it's just his pique that lawyers are beginning to get wise to his bias.
6) The Commision (to which Judge Harris' rulings are appealed) has reversed his findings of invalidity a number of times.
7) The fact that RMBS' lawyers were astute enough to withdraw the complaint illustrates again that RMBS is willing to retain the very best legal counsel and is another reason for confidence that it will ultimately prevail.
ITC
synchronous patent infringement case against Hyundai Ok, call me uninformed...but what does this have to do with hyundai? and what exactly does synchronous patent infringement case against Hyundai mean? when i hear the word Synchronous...i ussually think of SDRAM, not rambus. :) someone...please explain what that sentence means.
The anti-salmon
But it is clearly the "will of the people" that Rambus suceed, for it has been decided that Rambus is better and faster, so no doubt it would win the "popular vote", so I don't understand why this judge wouldn't allow Rambus to trample any opposition. I mean, come on, the people want Rambus, don't they?
Information is the catalyst for revolution
Really now... would you buy the first judge you looked at? Clearly, it's wise to shop around a little bit first. Compare prices. Contrast features. Make sure the judge you buy is a value.
Judges make procedural decisions like this all the time. What evidence will be allowed, which witnesses, cameras or no cameras, plaintiff pays fees if defendant wins, or the reverse. In most cases there's a clear beneficiary. The whole point of this process is that an impartial judge takes a case, and lawyers try not to piss off the judge, so they stay away from borderline stuff that might give an unfair advantage. The system balances out.
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
In the eyes of the law, a corporation is an individual entity. Any high school economics class will teach you that. Noone is disputing if Rambus' pratices are morally correct. In my opinion, I would love it if they took child molestors and shot them on site but even child molestors are entitled to due process as is any corporation. This isn't a victory for the little guy, but just another precident that can be used to squash the little guy. Slashdot will be the first place to have a bunch of people screaming due process but if we want to fight against this kind of thing it has to be in a legal way.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Can you say "one click shopping patent"? Knew ya could...
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
Now, I'm wondering, has Judge Harris conducted a little tete-a-tete with Judge Luckern, or is this airing of dirty laundry expected to chastise Judge Luckern publicly for being a soft touch? Were I the other judge I think I'd feel slighted, at the very least, by this ruling.
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
What happened to the briber & bribee?
Thats just how I see it though...
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
I was beginning to wonder how long the legal system was going to let big corporations run the tide of the legal system, clogging it with frivolous and repetitive lawsuits. Rambus needs to be tamed. They have a good product and don't need to strong-arm it on companies.
Cogito, ergo sum.
Another example of slashthink...Corps are bad!
Corps aren't *necessarily* bad. What's bad is when they start trying to buy laws/judges/etc, whether unsuccessfully (as in this case) or successfully (as with the DeCSS fiasco). It's a good thing, however, to see that Rambus is in trouble for doing this. Makes you realize that despite recent appearances, the entire legal system is not corrupt after all.
=================================
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
Something similar to this happened to my father when he lived in New York. A laywer in a case against him bribed the clerk to get a more favourable judge. This was brought to the original judge's notice and he made sure he got the case. It's a shame we don't see things like this more often. I guess we don't hear about the hero's in the legal system just as we don't hear about the sleeze. I think there should be a website devoted to reporting issues like these to the public.
Brazen forum-shopping has become almost a sacrament for American litigants, despite the fact that it is purportedly a violation of legal ethics to do this.
It is nice to see there is at least one jurist out there who still insists on upholding standards of ethical conduct in the law and is not afraid to throw his weight around in the pursuit of justice.
I only wish he could have slapped them harder. These repugnant swine with their incessant intellectual property law-based attacks on innovation in the computer industry, ludicrous patents and outrageous claims of ownership of everything under the sun have had their day for far too long, and I hope for a day when they are treated as the swine they are.
This is a step in the right direction.
How many Rambust stocks do you own?
In any case, they _were_ allowed to drop the case. So your first statement is moot.
What they're _not_ allowed to do is to keep refiling over and over again until they get a judge they like. They're free to refile... they're just going to end up with the same judge.
If they actually weren't judge-shopping, then none of this is even an issue for them.
Could someone explain how could a judge have this kind of authority?
Hadn't you heard that judges have more power than God? It's true.
More seriously, a judge with a valid reason to suspect a pattern of frivolous litigation and forum shopping is within his rights to demand that all further similar cases from the same litigant be taken to his court.
This is not a common remedy, but it is not unheard of either. It is especially likely when a litigant shows a pattern of such conduct, and is meant to defeat the tactic.
An instance I can think of is that the famously irascible Judge Manuel Real of the Central District Court of California (most famous for ordering Larry Flynt chucked in a psychiatric prison for spitting at him and showering him with obscenities) once ordered the crime cult of Scientology to bring all cases in the District to his court and no other. He also had a Scientology cult attorney chucked in prison that same day for contempt.
RAMBUS will go down in history as a textbook example of the old idea- do things right, and do them right the first time, or else your actions will catch up with you.
They made a technology company, and decided to focus on litigation and patent royalties rather than they innovations. And now they have been caught trying to work around hard judges in an effort to suck more money from other companies by litigation. Intel caught them, Judge Harris caught them, and it is all going to bring them down. Play fair or don't play at all.