Earlier this year Rambus won a staggering $307M USD
civil award against Hynix claiming the company infringed on its
intellectual property. Specifically, Rambus claimed that Hynix used
techniques for producing memory that were proprietary to Rambus. On
Friday morning, Judge Ronald Whyte of Northern District of California overturned
this award (PDF).
The latest statement from the court claimed "For the reasons set forth
below, plaintiffs' motion for a new trial on the issue of damages is GRANTED
unless Rambus files notice with the court within thirty (30) days of this order
accepting remittitur of the jury award to $133,584,129 for damages through
December 31, 2005."
The focal point for this overturn is due to discrepancies
of the actual amount of DRAM sales during the time period Hynix infringed on
Rambus IP. Rambus at this point may either accept the lesser award of
$133.6M USD or begin a new trial against Hynix.
Despite the interconnections between Hynix and Rambus, this slew of IP lawsuits
are not related to the price fixing sentencing from earlier this year where four Hynix executives were
given jail time. Within the past year every major DRAM manufacturer
has faced litigation from Rambus, with the exception of the company's primary
manufacturing partner Samsung. Rambus has also filed suits claiming that
all of the major DRAM providers artificially manipulated pricing on DRAM to hurt RDRAM
sales -- with fairly damning evidence on
the company website (PDF) -- again with the exception of Samsung. On
Friday 34 states filed anti-trust suits against most major DRAM providers claiming the companies
colluded to artificially inflate memory pricing, which is illegal in the US.
Once again, Samsung was absent from this volley of litigation as well.
More can be seen from the official Rambus Litigation Update
page. The company currently has twelve outstanding major cases to
quote: ElectronicNews posted an article that examines the issues in depth and quotes an anonymous former Intel employee about how the introduction of RDRAM into Intel's chipsets caused massive problems. Among the many bombs lobbed at Rambus are quotes about the i820 debacle such as, "The issues were not defects within the MTH. The issues were with the Rambus channel itself and the use of large packages at channel speeds."
...It looks like the Intel Architecture Group forced RDRAM down the throats of unwilling engineers and lost many of them because of it."
quote: Finally, I'd like to point out that RDRAM latency is dependent on the number of sticks installed. Even by 2002, it was impossible to find RDRAMs in sticks larger than 512MB, whereas DDR was available in sticks of 1GB and even 2GB. There were signalling and termination issues with the larger sizes chips.
quote: All memory latency is lowered by increased clock rates. This is nothing unique to RDRAM.
quote: Due to its higher latency, it underperformed DDR in some cases, and its higher bandwidth didn't translate into performance gains worth the price premium
quote: The memory companies did use rambus technology and fail to pay royalties... They werent innocent victims in all this. They also collude against the consumer frequently and almost all of them have been convicted of doing so in one way or another.
quote: Rambus DOES make something, they invented DDR signaling, they invented the superior RDRAM standard that was driven out of business by the "innocent" memory companies with outrageous pricing.
quote: Rambus has serial interconnect technology, XDR, and a huge research and development team made up of some of the greatest minds in the industry...