Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Decades-Old Rambus Litigation Against Micron For RDRAM Tech Reaches Settlement

Posted by samzenpus on from the now-shake-hands dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The decades-old Rambus litigation against Micron for RDRAM tech finally reached a settlement. RDRAM tech has already been licensed by NVidia and Broadcom and has been used in game consoles such as the Nintendo 64. The preliminary deal is to last 7 years and net $280M for Rambus and Micro to gain access to patent licenses defining the technology."

10 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Now I feel old. by Naatach · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you remember when this started?

    --
    There may be no "I" in team, but there's also no "F" in way.
    1. Re:Now I feel old. by t0qer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Statute of limitations only applies to when a case can be filed. A trial can go on for years past the statute.

    2. Re:Now I feel old. by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Rambus debacle actually pre-dates Slashdot.
      The patent cat fight started in 1990, and slashdot started in 1997. It was old news by the time it was first mentioned on Slashdot.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:Now I feel old. by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They absolutely had both an original idea and a working product. Just because they didn't have manufacturing facilities doesn't mean they didn't produce a product. Does AMD not have a working product because they spun-out and sold-off Global Foundries? Does Sony not have a product because they use AMD CPUs? RDRAM was absolutely rambus's product, that was never up for debate. What was up for debate was whether DDR memory infringed on their patents - it did, and they won just about all of their lawsuits.

    4. Re:Now I feel old. by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First off, it wasn't bogus - which is why micron lost. I'm no lover of RAMBUS but they absolutely had valid patents, and they did sell product. They lost the battle because their product was ultimately inferior and more expensive, but that doesn't change the fact the core technology behind DDR memory infringed on their ideas. As for how it's still valid - it doesn't matter. If you infringe a patent, get sued, and the patent runs out before the court case finishes, you aren't magically exonerated from all the years you infringed on the patent while in court. Doesn't work that way champ.

    5. Re:Now I feel old. by bhcompy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's talk about goalposts, then. What you're saying is that the NFL doesn't have a product because the products are the teams that are NFL licensed franchises and the NFL itself is just a logo without a product. I don't think the billions being paid to the NFL support that statement. Products don't have to be tangible to be products. A product can simply be a license to a design. A better statement would be that Rambus never manufactured the product(then again, many hardware companies pay other companies to manufacture their products)

    6. Re:Now I feel old. by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      First off, it wasn't bogus - which is why micron lost. I'm no lover of RAMBUS but they absolutely had valid patents, and they did sell product. They lost the battle because their product was ultimately inferior and more expensive, but that doesn't change the fact the core technology behind DDR memory infringed on their ideas.

      You're badly misunderstanding people's gripe with this whole thing. Of course the patents were valid. The whole point of the consortium was to come up with a non-patented standard, so when Rambus went behind everyone's back and patented the whole shebang of course there was no prior art. The other memory makers had gone out of their way not to patent it.

      And FYI, JEDEC won against Rambus in their lawsuit - Rambus was guilty of patenting stuff which was being discussed in secret at JEDEC. The problem was Rambus was only guilty of violating the terms of membership for JEDEC. The lawyers who drafted the membership agreement neglected to put in any penalties for patenting stuff behind everyone else's back, and as a result the only recourse JEDEC had was to kick Rambus out. There were no federal or criminal charges because they didn't break government law, they broke JEDEC's rules. The patents were still valid though, even though Rambus effectively stole them, because the there was no prior art and the USPTO decided it was patent-worthy.

      Speaking of which, do you really think DDR is worthy of a patent? Counting a clock tick not just when the voltage goes up, but also when the voltage goes down? That should be obvious to a 5-year old.

  2. This is horrible news by RelliK · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is absolutely disgusting. Rambus is the ultimate patent troll. For those not familiar, here is some history.

    Back in the 90's, Rambus became a member of JEDEC, an industry consortium of RAM manufacturers. JEDEC rules require members to disclose any patents that are relevant to the technology being discussed. Rambus didn't. It sat in on the meetings, listened, and modified its pending patent applications to cover DDR RAM. After the new RAM standard was adopted, Rambus surfaced its submarine patents and started suing everyone left and right.

    Add to that the fact is that Rambus itself does not manufacture anything -- it's a technology licencing house that has a few engineers and an army of lawyers -- and you get a perfect example of a patent troll.

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:This is horrible news by RelliK · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because US patent system effectively legalizes extortion. Some manufacturers rolled over and paid "licencing", but others, like Infineon decided to fight. The jury in Infineon v. Rambus ruled in favor of Infineon, but then Rambus appealed to the federal circuit and got that decision overturned. PJ, of groklaw fame, put it thusly: "federal circuit has never seen a patent it didn't like".

      This is just a short summary, you can find more info if you like. Rambus extorted money from pretty much everyone who has so much as touched RAM.

      --
      ___
      If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    2. Re:This is horrible news by Pinhedd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Add to that the fact is that Rambus itself does not manufacture anything -- it's a technology licencing house that has a few engineers and an army of lawyers -- and you get a perfect example of a patent troll.

      ARM Holdings PLC is an R&D company that doesn't manufacture anything. They generate all of their revenue through licencing IP to third parties whom in turn do the manufacturing. I do not see anyone calling them a patent troll.

      Rambus Inc. is definitely a shady corporation but simply failing to manufacture products with IP that one owns and initiating litigation against those who infringe upon it does not automatically make one a patent troll.