Techdirt. Stories filed under "dram" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "dram"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Thu, 27 Sep 2012 19:59:00 PDT DRAM Patent Holder Rambus Called Out (Again) For Shredding Evidence Tim Cushing http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120925/20430720512/dram-patent-holder-rambus-called-out-again-shredding-evidence.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120925/20430720512/dram-patent-holder-rambus-called-out-again-shredding-evidence.shtml Rambus Inc. is back in the news again as some of its questionable pre-litigation tactics have been highlighted by another company on the receiving end of a patent infringement lawsuit. Rambus Inc. sued SK Hynix and several other chip builders at the beginning of 2000, claiming to hold the rights to certain DRAM technology. 

Rambus is perhaps best known for a move that took place well over a decade ago, shortly before it went into the innovation-via-litigation business.
On Friday, Whyte found that Rambus destroyed documents when it anticipated litigation. Specifically, Whyte said, Rambus employees were told to destroy documents at annual "shred days," from 1998 to 2000, prior to filing the patent suits.

Because litigation was "reasonably foreseeable," Whyte ruled, Rambus should had preserved the documents.

"Rambus engaged in spoliation of evidence when it engaged in the destruction of documents on all three shred days," the 66-page ruling states.
"Annual shred days?" The fact that Rambus had not only a periodic event but a nickname for the event should probably be taken as an indication that the "company" needed to rid itself of possibly damning paperwork. It calls to mind something akin to mobsters moving suitcases of cash to their mothers' houses ahead of a RICO investigation.

Now, many companies will annually shred financial documents, personnel files, etc. that have reached the expiration date of federal and state retention requirements. However, what Rambus did hardly sounds like just being tidy, despite its "engineers are messy" defense.
Rambus countered that its engineers tended to be "pack rats" and said that its policy was justified...
SK Hynix had brought Rambus' "shredding days" to the attention of the disctrict court back in 2005, claiming that "Rambus had spoliated evidence and that its 'unclean hands' warranted dismissal of 15 infringement claims." This claim was dismissed and in 2011, US District Judge Ronald Whyte ordered SK Hynix to pay $397 million in royalties. On appeal, Whyte reexamined Hynix's claims and found that Rambus had indeed shredded plenty of documents, but possibly nothing relevant.
"The evidence does not show that Rambus knowingly destroyed damaging evidence," Whyte said.

"Although the evidence does not support a conclusion that Rambus deliberately shredded documents it knew to be damaging, the court concludes that Rambus nonetheless spoliated evidence in bad faith or at least willfully," he added.
He also gave Rambus a bit of a post-facto warning.
Because litigation was "reasonably foreseeable," Whyte ruled, Rambus should had preserved the documents.
Then there's this, in which Whyte states that the litigation might have gone differently if no documents had been shredded.
"Even if none of the destroyed documents would have shed new light on the disclosure obligation, there may have been internal Rambus documents containing information about Rambus' plans to gain market power by using information learned at [Joint Electron Device Engineering Council] JEDEC meetings. Such evidence could have been relevant and given support to Hynix's equitable claims and defenses," Whyte said.

"The court concludes that Hynix has made a plausible, concrete suggestion that it may have been prejudiced by destruction of JEDEC-related documents, and that Rambus has not overcome this suggestion of prejudice by clear and convincing evidence."
Despite all this, SK Hynix is still on the hook for royalties. The $397 million might be reduced, but any reduction would have more to do with royalties Rambus has already collected from other companies, rather than any excessive shredding or the fact that it basically reverse engineered its patents to cover new industry standards. Unfortunately for SK Hynix, the shredding that has already resulted in two Rambus infringement suits being tossed out doesn't seem to be doing much for it.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> no-evidence-that-destroyed-evidence-was-relevant...-wait,-what? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120925/20430720512 Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:50:36 PDT Jury Has No Problem With Rambus Patent Tricks; But Let's Wait For The Appeal Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/233400662.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/233400662.shtml sneaky tricks in making sure that they had patents that covered a DRAM standard -- but the question was whether or not those tricks were actually illegal. The EU and the FTC both decided that Rambus' actions were illegal, but the company just kept hiring lawyers and has now convinced a jury it did nothing wrong. This isn't a surprise as juries almost always side with patent holders, in part due to the great American myth that a patent is a wonderful thing not to be questioned. But, Rambus is extremely premature in announcing: "This ruling should put to rest a series of ongoing allegations Rambus has endured for many years." Hardly. There will be appeals that are going to drag this out even longer. In the meantime, we fully expect angry Rambus investors to complain about this post again as they've done in the past. After that post, someone sent me an angry email saying that I had been reported to both Rambus and the feds for slander. I'm still waiting for the lawsuit.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> ain't-over-yet http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080326/233400662