Nvidia faces possible ban on imports after USITC ruling in Rambus patent suit

By Matthew · 30 replies
Jan 25, 2010
  1. The Virginia Court Findings in Samsung v. Rambus (Eastern Dist. Virgina 2006) 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50007... lol come on man


    In sum, the offer of the full amount in dispute brought an end to the case and controversy between Rambus and Samsung. At that point the district court also lacked subject matter jurisdiction to rule on the attorney fees motion. The case became moot. Accordingly, this court vacates the order of the district court denying Samsung's application for attorney fees and entering findings with respect to the spoliation of evidence as issued without jurisdiction. The case is remanded to the district court with the instruction that the court dismiss Samsung's complaint.
  2. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,262

    An email exchange in 1995 between MIke Farmwald (Rambus co-patent holder) and Rambus employee Richard Crisp reveals that there were some in the industry who thought that Rambus' DRAM solution relied on earlier work done by an organization called SCI. Farmwald dismissed this position as "completely ridiculous' and wrote that he had 'had the idea for Rambus while still working at MIPS in very early 1988, possibly even 1987", which was before he started receiving SCI meeting notes in 1989.
    However, Farmwald, during at least some portion of his time as an employee of MIPS, was subject to a non-disclosure and invention agreement, which provided that, under certain conditions, Farmwald's idea for Rambus would have been owned by MIPS

    District Judge Robinson's opinion on spoliation in the case of Micron Tech v Rambus Inc.

    You "Guest"s seem to be confusing my personal disgust at your company's business ethos with some misguided analogy that I deem Samsung et al with somehow not being deserving of punishment under the law.
    Until patent reform renders parasites like Rambus null and void, the law stands and I have no quarrel with the court findings.
    Howevah ! This does not mitigate the fact that Rambus is a company that is totally devoid of moral fibre.

    You can quote legelese until your meagre pension plan kicks in. The fact remains that the (correct) public image of Rambus is of a tapeworm in the body of the tech community.
    You produce little, and aside from litigation the future holds less.
    Rambus sits proudly at the forefront of one-dimensional propaganda and patent ambush.
    Why is it that Rambus employees cannot find at least one source of support outside of a legal judgement ?
  3. Archean

    Archean TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,690   +95

    Very well put ;) lol
  4. Matthew

    Matthew TechSpot Staff Topic Starter Posts: 5,316   +100

    And how many of those were issued in the last year? A basic search on the USPTO's database shows 77. How many of them are substantial technologies or products? I'm guessing not many -- if any. Rambus has no meaningful product-related press releases on its site in recent times, and its own patent page hasn't been updated since 2008.

    This doesn't mean very much considering the size differences between operations and actual nature of the patents, but by comparison, let's look at the patent activity of some other tech companies in the same period:

    Intel: 1535 patents.
    Nvidia: 272 patents.
    Sandisk: 334 patents.
    Samsung: 5101 patents.
    Micron: 973 patents.

    I stand by my statement: It doesn't sound like those 200+ engineers have been very busy. And yes, in my opinion Rambus is all-but-defunct. It's living on through patent trolling and resulting licensing royalties. Spare me and the TechSpot community of another two dozen paragraphs of legalese and irrelevant, decade-old court logs.
  5. Julio Franco

    Julio Franco TechSpot Editor Posts: 7,485   +880

    Putting this topic to rest. There was a lot of argumentation from both sides which is always positive, however considering the number of replies made by guest user(s) and some indecorous emails we received, this is starting to look more like a trolling attempt than anything else.

    We can't say for sure either, but ideally company delegates and employees should identify themselves as such, so the rest of readers can know where they are coming from.
  6. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,262

Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...