Slashdot Mirror
Litigious Rambus Wins Again
After Rambus's settlement deal with Samsung earlier this week, an anonymous reader writes with this snippet: "Memory technology company Rambus rounded out the week with another legal dispute ending in its favor as it fights to defend its patent portfolio. On Friday [the] US International Trade Commission ruled that graphics chip maker Nvidia infringed upon Rambus patents, according to statements released by the two companies on Friday. Rambus has been filing lawsuits against various technology companies for the past decade, claiming they violate patents held by the memory chip designer."
This one's a tough call... the have been one of the most litigious of the tech companies, but on the other hand they seem to keep winning in the courts. Doesn't the definition of a patent troll include suing people with nonsense lawsuits? They seem to have come up with some ideas so critical to memory that everyone else in the industry can't seem to make a product without tripping over the patent law. Do we praise the inventors, or hate them because we hate patents?
...The US Trade Commission is not a court.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
When an idea is so critical to something it cannot be worked around, it is far too obvious to be deserving of a patent.
That's nonsense.
If there is no work-around you have pretty much proven that the solution to the problem is not obvious and that the patent is legitimate.
When I think of Rambus and how they as a company act... I can not help but think of SCO.
Perhaps with a final ending not unlike that as well.
And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
In what universe is it true that there being only one known way to solve a particular problem means that one solution is not obvious?
In fact, when everyone who approaches the problem arrives at the same solution, that's usually proof that the solution is obvious.
The enemies of Democracy are
Seems to me you posted on the wrong thread :P
A car analogy! Sweet now I get it
Here's to the crazy ones
You appear lost.
I didn't think I did. I think Slashdot is fucked up. If you open another topic and go back to the original thread, it seems replies might end up in the wrong thread.
They're kinda a troll and kinda not. They were awarded patents for their inventions... and they were awarded patents for what they overheard at JEDEC and then ran off and patented (and no one else did first because the whole point was to devise a patent-royalty-free standard).
The enemies of Democracy are
Yep, a traditional patent troll doesn't file for the patent themselves, they buy somebody else's patent cheaply under the pretense that the original inventor is getting nothing because they can't mount the massive legal campaign... the new owners then sue the world. Big profit in the unlikely event they win, and that's how they justify the cost. One of these days, that lottery combo will be drawn.
The patent wars are about to get really ugly. Just about everybody is gunning for an injunction against everybody else, especially in the forefront of innovation like cellular phones, ebooks, netbooks, tablets, user interfaces, networks and wireless communications, memory technologies and so on.
It's a jungle out there, and I can think of no better example of how patents prevent progress. Nobody can make anything without getting sued to oblivion. The lawyers are making five times what the engineers are - a disparity that gets worse with every passing year. Lawyers never invented anything but arguments and flights of fancy. It's just not possible to enter business. The system is broken.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I always thought, Rambus was a law firm with a straw business in memory technology.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
They *were* a legitimate technology company. Building their undisclosed patents into a JEDEC standard makes them a troll. Not starting litigation until well after the standard had become widely adopted makes them a super-troll.
What do you want to bet those aren't the patents they are winning on?
But that is a point. They did patent a few obvious things. On the other hand, they had some innovative technology of their own blatantly stolen.
Before commenting (especially if you are defending Rambus) you might want to do a search on "rambus jedec spec". The google search is:
http://www.google.com/search?q=rambus+jedec+spec&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a/
One of the results is:
http://www.abanet.org/antitrust/committees/intell_property/june21.html/ (FTC Charges Rambus With Abuse of Standard Setting Process).
In a nutshell, Rambus participated in the standards setting process for SDRAM technology without informing any of the other members that they were actively pursuing patents in the technology used to implement the standard. Once the standard was finalized, they disclosed the patents and demanded royalties.
Methinks that Rambus was in the wrong. So does the FTC.
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
John 8:32(King James Version)
My name is Litigious Rambus, manufacturer of the SDRAM on the Northbridge, General Counsel for the Federal Circuit, loyal servant to the true emperor, Thomas Lavelle (US). Maker of a murdered spec, keeper of the spoliated evidence. And I will have my settlement, in this life or the next.
(This is a first pass at it. Feel free to improve.)
What do you want to bet those aren't the patents they are winning on?
Oh just about anything since anybody who was interested in the technology they actually invented paid for it. :P
But that is a point. They did patent a few obvious things. On the other hand, they had some innovative technology of their own blatantly stolen.
It's not that they were obvious. It's that they didn't invent them. Someone else did. But because of how fucked our patent system is, being the first one to file a patent is more important than being the one to invent.
Anyway, I haven't seen any cases where their actual technology was blatantly stolen. I've only seen cases where their patent rights to the technology they stole was upheld.
TFA gives no indication which this is, but since it's NVidia that suggests it's related to GDDR in which case it's the later.
The enemies of Democracy are
Its not so much that it wasn't a good idea, but that they negotiated in bad faith. The background is that a group of many manufacturers got together to make a memory standard that they could all use. They each chipped in ideas, and didn't patent them. Rambus steered the standard towards something that would include things they had already patented, and hoped no one would notice the patents. No one did. They then did not immediately sue, but waited until the standard was widely used by many of the original group, and others, so that paying the settlements would be preferable to the cost of switching standards. This is not simply patent trolling per the usual standard. This is an example of fraud. The company should get dissolved to pay remunerations towards those it defrauded, all patents released into public domain, and its board charged with felonies.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Rambus PATENTED, but not invented.
They are trolls. Here is why. They took ideas from JEDEC standards conference. They then begin to patent those ideas without disclosing that to others involved in setting standards at that conference. They then wait for the technology to mature and become widespread, and they sue everyone. It's bullshit. They invented NOTHING, they stole forming standards, patented them, sat and waited, and sued.
Rambus has innovated and invented very little since the EARLY 90s.
They do not deserve the patent or the favorable rulings, for any legal or ethical reason.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
There are two ways to do it - be lighter than air, or equal your weight with thrust.
You can easily make the case that simple physics will allow you to arrive at both solutions.
But you haven't arrived at your destination - you've only made a bare suggestion of two possible ways to get there.
You can't patent the dream of flight.
You can't patent the physical laws that make it possible.
You can patent the practical flying machine - the essential components that take flight out of the realm of fantasy and science fiction.
I'm just poking in the dark here, but doesn't that then qualify as prior art? If the wronged parties can show the ideas were publicly discussed at the conference before the patent...?
They took SOME ideas from JEDEC. Please show me where the ideas behind their own Rambus memory was in the ideas that they "borrowed".
You need to understand that Rambus was in the memory design business before they were invited to participate in JEDEC. Otherwise, guess what? They wouldn't have been invited to participate in JEDEC! What, you think they just pull in anybody off the street?
Rambus memory was designed, patented, and MARKETED before DDR2 came along. I challenge you to show otherwise.
Further, you seem to fail to understand that Rambus memory was a manufactured and actually sold product long before DDR2. Rambus was NOT just a patent trolling company. They licensed and sold faster and cheaper memory than anyone else at the time. That kind of puts your timeline out of whack.
I am rather amused that somebody chose to mark my own comments "troll". Jesus, there are some asshole modders on Slashdot.
I fully expect this one to be marked "troll" too. We shall see.
I do not think that you are remembering things clearly. Rambus was competing with the original DDR, not DDR2. Yes, the original Rambus was slightly faster than DDR, but with horrible latency issues compared to it. Read some chipset reviews for a VIA DDR chipset on a P IV vs Rambus. Also, Rambus was originally shoved down or throats by Intel on the Pentium III (or at least they tried). Rambus was also a lot more expensive to manufacture being a totally new design, while DDR was an extension of standard SDRAM. Much like how HD-DVD was cheaper to make than Blu-Ray being an extension of an existing process.
Also, I believe that Rambus originally went after the memory makers for DDR, not just DDR2. So yes, after latency was taken care of in streaming, it was faster, but it was never cheaper.
Excuse me, you are correct. It was DDR, not DDR2. But that isn't really the issue. The rest of the argument stands: in order to make DDR mamory, they infringed on Rambus' patents. I understand that you don't seem to like the idea, but it is still the truth.
And the fact that Rambus was "shoved down or throats" [sic], is completely irrelevant to whether their patents on faster memory were valid. That is known as a "straw man" argument.
And yes, Rambus was more expensive. That is a point I made myself. But that is still irrelevant: AT THE TIME, it was the only faster memory available.
And yes, it was cheaper when originally marketed, because the only thing that beat it in speed was SRAM, which was very expensive indeed.
Basically, you bring up lots of things that happened afterward, and seem to be arguing that those things somehow invalidate a legitimate patent. Hint: NOT.
They took SOME ideas from JEDEC. Please show me where the ideas behind their own Rambus memory was in the ideas that they "borrowed".
The ideas for the patents behind their own RDRAM (Rambus DRAM) memory was their own idea and are perfectly fine and valid. Anyone who wanted to use RDRAM technology has properly licensed it.
The patents that cover DDR are not the patents that cover RDRAM, because the technologies have virtually nothing in common! The patents covering DDR are the ones Rambus filed after listening in on JEDEC meetings and hearing the ideas of the other JEDEC members!
If Rambus hadn't filed those patents based on other people's technology, and only had the patents on their own invention, RDRAM, there would be no patent suits.
So who cares that RDRAM came before DDR? They are not based on the same technology, and even RAMBUS knows that even if you don't.
The enemies of Democracy are
DDR2 is a different technology. Ahem. DDR2 doesn't require terminator chips. DDR2 operates on a different p/n junction. There's so much physically you probably wouldn't understand unless you were a material engineer, and I can't explain it myself ebcause I'm a few years away from the necessary degree.
But then again, I WORK IN THE SEMICONDUCTOR BUSINESS. Not RAM, specificaly, but RAMBUS lawsuits have been a pain in the ass for emerging LED technologies, and we're going to bury their asses in the ground once we get our momentum, because half of those ideas were taken directly from our field.
Rambus has a HUGE target on its back from the rest of the semiconductor industry. They won't be around for long and I'm going to be one of those pioneers that brings them down.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
SHOW ME THE PATENT INFRINGED.
That is all. Having several in this field, I'll bet you stumble across something I can use to sue Rambus for a hefty sum.
Evidence, please.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
That's ridiculous. Pay me the same rate as Rambus' lawyers get, and I will show you the patent infringed. Until then, dream on.
The facts as I know them and the timeline are still solidly behind my position. If you know as much about it as you claim, perhaps YOU can show ME why their patents were not infringed. After all, the courts decided that they were. Do you really know better?