Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rambus Could Reap Millions In Patent Settlements

Posted by kdawson on from the what-innovation-looks-like-now dept.

RedEaredSlider writes "Rambus, a designer of semiconductor chips, won a long-running patent battle with NVIDIA, but that dispute is not the only one the company is involved in — and the upcoming decisions could mean millions in additional revenue. Besides the NVIDIA decision, Rambus is involved in a suit with Hynix Semiconductor that will be heard in October. In that case, Hynix had originally sued Rambus in 2000, but Rambus counter-sued. Hynix lost, and appealed. The parties will appear before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in October. A judgment in Rambus's favor would be worth at least $397 million, according to the company's general counsel, Tom Lavelle."

18 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Rambus... by Sol+Rosinberg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, there's a company I haven't heard of in years. Didn't they make some hideously expensive RAM that was supposed to perform twice as well as normal RAM, but never lived up to the hype? Basically, they patented the design, couldn't get it to work right, and now they're suing the companies who did.

    1. Re:Rambus... by obeythefist · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those are the guys! It was many years ago. They apparently sat on some big RAM council board, took a bunch of notes, and sprinted to the patent office as soon as the meeting was over. BAM! Patent infringement lawsuits all over the place.

      Unlike other patent trolls, however, they did manage to release a horrible implementation of a quasi-serial memory bus that had atrocious real world performance. And managed to persuade Intel to get in bed with them, which for many was a big reason that AMD was doing so well at the time.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    2. Re:Rambus... by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, no, they got it to work right. It worked four times as fast (at the time) but it cost more than four times as much. And they didn't allow anybody else to produce the chips by refusing to sell license their patent to other manufacturers. And you had to buy in pairs (and have those stupid blanks in unpopulated slots, and who wants to buy those stupid things?). And they didn't reduce the price at all even though the competition began to close the gap in speed and surpassed them in capacity.

      RDRAM failed because it was more expensive due to price fixing monopoly, short in supply due to monopoly, more difficult to use and install, and advanced more slowly than the competition (due to a smaller set of researchers working on improving it). And Intel priced their processors far and above the price of AMD's DDR-only, better-performing competition. RDRAM is a good example of customer demand shaping the market.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    3. Re:Rambus... by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wow, there's a company I haven't heard of in years. Didn't they make some hideously expensive RAM that was supposed to perform twice as well as normal RAM, but never lived up to the hype? Basically, they patented the design, couldn't get it to work right, and now they're suing the companies who did.

      Actually, they're quite big and raking in the dough. They're in one of the best selling consoles, and in this generation's worst-selling console.

      Yes, the PS2 has 32MB of RAMBUS RDRAM in it. It was one of their big announcements after thair failed foray into PCs.

      And yes, there's also 256MB of XDR DRAM in the PS3 (the other 256 is GDDR3 for the nVidia RSX). XDR technology is owned by RAMBUS.

      Despite not selling well in the PC world, they're doing good enough in other markets. Hell, many /.'ers probably own a PS3 and thus have contributed to this patent trolling. Probably some of those complaining about patent trolls in this article too will extol the virtues of the PS3 (or PS2) in other threads without realizing that they're really just helping RAMBUS.

    4. Re:Rambus... by obeythefist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ohh I didn't realise that if you patent troll an illegal oligopoly, it's no longer patent trolling, it is in fact awesome patenting for great justice?

      No, patent trolls are patent trolls.

      I didn't know Rambus employees were able to get onto slashdot to post as AC's, though, I thought the RAM in their desktops was too slow to allow them to log on.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    5. Re:Rambus... by JackieBrown · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If we PS3 owners can get past the fact that we are helping Sony, I doubt helping RAMBUS will cause much worry.

    6. Re:Rambus... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 5, Informative

      It was only faster for a very short period.

      When DDR came out and was adopted, it had higher throughput than RDRAM. And both SDRAM and DDR had lower latency. So SDRAM actually was higher performing in many cases and DDR was in all cases.

      In no time, you had to buy the fastest (most expensive) RDRAM 800 and in pairs in order to come even close to matching DDR on performance.

      A bank of RDRAM 800 had 1600MB/sec bandwidth, while a single bank of 133MHz (DDR-266) had 2166MB/sec bandwidth. A single bank of PC-133 SDRAM had 1066MB/sec bandwidth and much lower latency. Most RDRAM systems (before the very end) had RDRAM 600 in them, for a bandwidth of 1200MB/sec.

      RDRAM's advantage the whole time was the ability to put in a lot more RAM than with DDR because since each DIMM regenerated the signal before passing it on, you could daisy chain RAM as far away as you'd like, unlike where with SDRAM or DDR the total bus length was limited by the capacitance placed on by all the DIMMs on the bus.

      In essence, RDRAM had the same advantages and disadvantages of FB-DIMMs, which was also driven out of the market by cheaper and faster DDR3.

      --
      http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    7. Re:Rambus... by amorsen · · Score: 4, Informative

      It worked four times as fast (at the time) but it cost more than four times as much.

      Only in bandwidth. Latency sucked big time, and processors back then weren't very good at hiding latency, so real-world non-benchmark performance wasn't any better than decent SDRAM.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    8. Re:Rambus... by asc99c · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the problem people have with RAMBUS is specifically that they sat in on the JEDEC working groups to watch the development of new standards, and then when everyone had decided on the design and invested huge amounts of money, they piped up that they had a patent on it. This was completely against the principles of the JEDEC working groups - where the meetings are specifically aimed at ensuring they are developing an open standard free from their member's patents which might otherwise block the technology - not necessarily 100% unpatented, but where they know what the patent licensing agreements are. Generally all the members agree to cross-licence the patents between themselves - this is the 'cost' of joining the JEDEC standards group.

      The RAMBUS technology (and to a leser extent, it's implementation) is actually rather good, so they aren't a classic patent troll, but their submarine patent on DDR technology makes them clearly some form of patent troll.

    9. Re:Rambus... by RMH101 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I remember working 2nd line support for a company with a load of RAMBUS Dells. Caused a bit of a commotion when the usual upgrade-by-slapping-in-more-RAM option was costed. I can remember it costing more than a new Optiplex at the time. Much hilarity with management.

  2. Re:"a designer of semiconductor chips" ???? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No. NO. Rambus is an IP troll, at best they specify how chips talk to each other on a motherboard. Smarter people then design chips.

    Yeah. Rambus has a lot in common with SCO ... parasitic beasts at best.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. The SCO outlook by coldmist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although their chances are better than SCO's (debatable, but I'd give it to them), this story sounds as rosy as an SCO fanboy writing their weekly column.

    "could mean millions" Could. Could.

    I really wish we had a news service that posted honest stories.

    Rambus has sued the world, and finally one of them stuck. nVidia is the loser this time. If only Rambus would die, then we could all move on in life.

    See how much nicer that would be! ;)

    --
    Don't steal. The government hates competition.
    1. Re:The SCO outlook by Lawbeefaroni · · Score: 4, Informative

      "One of them stuck?" Of the top of my head, Samsung recently (2010) settled with them for something like $200M plus $100/year for 5 years for licensing, plus shares for a grand total of $900M.

      Hate to break the news to you but Rambus isn't going to die. Unless someone like Samsung buys them.

      --
      "When it rains, it pours." --Morton's Salt
  4. Re:"a designer of semiconductor chips" ???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually Rambus is doing research and making test devices as well as ASICs on behalf of other companies.
    Very much like ARM and IBM.

    Rambus has a 2:1 lawyer to engineer ratio (they did 2-3 years ago), which skews them towards patent troll ;)

  5. patent troll by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rambus is one company that needs to be nuked from orbit while all of their lawyers and officers are locked in the building.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  6. Re:"a designer of semiconductor chips" ???? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nope, sorry, they are patent trolls. If you read the history of their involvement with JEDEC, they basically fucked EVERYBODY, including us consumers, by sitting in on the SDRAM meetings and secretly patenting everything that wasn't nailed down.

    So while they may have invented a few cool things their actions at JEDEC were total patent trolling and any patents that arose from those meetings seriously needs to get tossed out. Instead what will happen is you Mr Anon Coward, Me, and everybody else will pay more for memory of ANY kind, be it for motherboards, GPUs, or frankly just about anything using modern memory tech, because those trolls were allowed to steal everything that wasn't nailed down. So unless some completely new memory tech comes down the pipe (and even then as broad as the patents are you might nor even escape then) we will ALL be paying a "RAMBUS tax" on anything that has memory for the next 20+ years. What we need is a company like IBM or Google to come along and buy them out and offer their patents with RAND pricing, instead of allowing these trolls to continue to exist.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  7. Re:and all the compsci want to know by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Where do I go for sexual harassment. I'm not getting any,

    Prison.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  8. Re:Not quite by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Other companies than Samsung tried to manufacture RDRAM and failed even more, because of poor quality control. The fact is the design was complex, and hard to manufacture, leading to all sorts of issues, including localized heat zones. If you remember, RDRAM was when we started seeing heat spreaders in memory modules.

    Sending a signal on both edges of the clock has been done since like forever. I learned it in class before Rambus was even founded. If DDR infringes on a patent because of that, the patent office needs to review its standards for accepting patent applications.