Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick




FTC Tells Rambus It Needs To License Its Chip Tech At A Set Price

from the oops dept

Ah, Rambus. There's just something about this company (or, more accurately, it's wildly angry investors) who make it fun to follow. The various lawsuits have been going on for quite some time, but the accusations basically stated that Rambus quietly filed patent applications on technology that they knew was being standardized without telling the standards board. That way, once the standard was set and the patents were approved, they could charge everyone a nice fee. In a later case, Rambus was also accused of destroying documents, though they were later exonerated over that claim. Still, that never stops the somewhat rabid investors in Rambus from flooding many message boards insisting that the company can do no wrong -- and anyone who points to some of the more questionable patenting activities of the company is obviously part of some grand conspiracy (we've even been accused of corruption after discussing one Rambus case). Unfortunately, it appears that the FTC doesn't agree with that crowd. It's now decided that Rambus must license its DRAM chips to other vendors and do so at a capped royalty fee, as punishment for what the company has done. Of course, Rambus plans to appeal, to drag this issue out even longer. To be honest, it's not clear that it really makes much of a difference what the FTC does at this point, but given the history of stories around this company and the vehement insistence that it's squeaky clean, it seemed worth noting that the FTC still sees things the other way.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    Mike (profile), 5 Feb 2007 @ 6:41pm

    Re: Rambus

    Watch out Noel... the Rambus investor fans may get angry with you. Last time I pointed to Rambus' patent abuse, I got angry emails from Rambus investors, claiming that Rambus legal counsel as well as the FBI had been alerted to my lies, and it was likely that I'd soon be hearing from both.

    And then there were the charges of "corruption."

    You may be next... :)

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.