FTC Pursues Rambus Appeal To Supreme Court

pheede writes "SCOTUSblog brings us news that the FTC has appealed the recent circuit court decision regarding Rambus's deceptive conduct on the JEDEC standards committee, where they conveniently avoided telling anyone that they owned patents on the resulting standards. The FTC, which is proceeding on its own without help from the Justice Department, notes the circuit court's 'sweeping rules that would immunize' deceptive conduct by would-be monopolists 'in most circumstances.'"

Comments

Magnuson-Moss

[Anonymous Coward]

The Commission noted that this was the fourth time it had appealed a case to the Supreme Court without the U.S. Solicitor General... The agency said it has had that authority since he Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act went into effect in July 1975.

I've heard of Magnuson-Moss mostly in the auto world, where it's known as the law that forcing manufacturers to cover warranty repairs on modified vehicles unless it can be shown that third party parts, modifications, or unintended usage contributed to the failure needing repair.

This is an interesting use of Magnuson-Moss which, as far as I can tell from the Wikipedia article, comes from the section stating "Likewise, service contracts must fully, clearly, and conspicuously disclose their terms and conditions in simple and readily understood language." What a great law.

Re:comon practice?

[Ironsides]

When ATSC was created, everyone knew who owned the patents on the different parts of it. What RAMBUS did was guide the standards process so that the standard would involve patents they own in the standard, without letting them know.
R The difference here is that RAMBUS disguised the fact that they had patents on the technology in the standard while in ATSC everyone knew about the patents before hand. That is the difference.