Rambus Under Fire in Patent Battle With Nvidia

[Guest]

Not once has ANYONE proven what document(s) were destroyed that could have hurt them. Both Micron & Hynix also destroyed documents. If you own a patent and have all of the filings,etc. and they were approved by the gov't. What other documents could you have in your possession that you threw out that would prove anything???? Rambus only foolish mistake was implementing a document policy in the first place.

These companies don't want to pay for the Rambus inventions and continually use the flimsy "document" destruction argument so they can continue to steal Rambus IP.

Rambus mgmt is not good at PR so you only hear the other side of the story.

So remember if you ever have an idea or invent something and have it patented, unless you also build it yourself you will forever be called a patent troll.

Educate yourself before you keep making mindless accusations.

 

[reggieray]

conceded that it destroyed documents relating to the patent case
Just replace patent case with a corrupt government program and it is the same
Sounds like our hacks in DC

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]zybch[/nom]Whats more, the weak-willed idiots they sued PAYED UP, paving the legal precedent to force everyone else to pay also.[/citation]

you have the realise that high level litigation like this could cost millions a month, and a good chance you would lose and be forced to pay anyway.

they probably did infringe on some patents, and just decided paying is better than fighting.

[citation][nom]leper84[/nom]From wiki-"In January 2005, Rambus filed four more lawsuits against memory chip makers Hynix Semiconductor, Nanya Technology, Inotera Memories and Infineon Technology claiming that DDR 2, GDDR 2 and GDDR 3 chips contain Rambus technology. In March 2005, Rambus had its claim for patent infringements against Infineon dismissed. Rambus was accused of shredding key documents prior to court hearings, the judge agreed and dismissed Rambus' case against Infineon."and another-"On January 9, 2009, a Delaware federal judge ruled that Rambus could not enforce patents against Micron Technology Inc., stating that Rambus had a "clear and convincing" show of bad faith, and ruled that Rambus' destruction of key related documents (spoliation of evidence) nullified its right to enforce its patents against Micron. [10]"So I guess Rambus has a thing for shredding documents. Are these two and Nvidia's case related or does Rambus stand on such shaky ground they've seriously done this three times in a row?[/citation]

i loled, it was business as usual for them

 

[beayn]

[citation][nom]valu3hunt3r[/nom]Myth debunked.http://semiaccurate.com/forums/sho [...] count=1160Sooner trust Charlie (not saying I trust him 100% btw) than nordichardware.[/citation]

Charlie... I'd trust a random troll on the internet before him.

 

[clonazepam]

Ewww... Rambus. Remember Intel pairing Pentium IIIs with Rambus RAM? Utter ridiculousness, both in performance 'gain' and price.

 

[flipster]

This is the third time Rambus shredded documents. Surely they can't be taken very seriously anymore.

 

[jsc]

Actually, we are lucky. If RAMBUS had written their patents a little more loosely to cover all serial data transmissions on a motherboard instead of just memory,they could have locked up PCI Express and possibly SATA.

 

[jkflipflop98]

I'm guessing they're going to stop with the document shredding after this one. Or they're completely retarded.

 

[jamesedgeuk2000]

[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]Ewww... Rambus. Remember Intel pairing Pentium IIIs with Rambus RAM? Utter ridiculousness, both in performance 'gain' and price.[/citation]

Are you mad? say what you like about the company but their products delivered big time, A pair of PC800 RIMMs made SD-133 systems look like they were running in slow motion, even P4 DDR-266 systems couldn't keep up with P4 PC1066 Rambus sysystems, if they had kept up with development they would still be on top.

DDR may have had higher bandwidth but Rambus was much faster in some situations it made little difference, in others it did.