General discussion

Locked

Rambus: Hidden Gem

By arno ·
Rambus is one of the most creative IP companies of the universe. Their inventions are foundational to modern computers, networks, cell phones, cars, televisions and virtually everything that needs fast data transfer between computing chips.

Rambus was founded by two world-renowned Stanford researchers at a time when their invention was more than 50x faster than anything out there. That was around 1990.

In fact, their inventions were protected by patents which made them so powerful, that virtually all international memory manufacturers (Micron, Hynix, Infineon, Samsung, Elpida) conspired against them. Trying to kill Rambus, they have undergone years of criminal antitrust activity, and successfully pushed Rambus' main product (RDRAM - the fastest memory back then) out of the market. Even Intel was forced to give in and switched back to a much slower memory for their Intel P4. Even now, Intel is still suffering from that shock.

Years of corruption at the level of organizations, lawfirms, and even judges have led to turbulent stock action, down from above $100 to below $4.

Now, after their first patent trial in 6 years, Rambus is stronger than ever, with patents upheld in court, with absolutely no wrongdoing of their part. This has been confirmed by the Appeals court and the Supreme court.

Other than more corruption - which will not stand the test against time and the courts - there is no reason that Rambus should not be entitled to earn billions of dollars for their inventions and for compensation for having to endure collusive antitrust crimes for more than a decade.

As soon as settlements are signed, this stock might jump to well above $100, many believe it will hit $500 within the next few years.

You can find much more information on
http://rambus.org/story/

Thanks for your time.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Rambus has not done anything wrong

by arno In reply to nice story

Citing from the FTC Initial Decision:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9302/040223initialdecision.pdf

"Complaint Counsel have failed to sustain their burden of proof with respect all three of the violations alleged in the Complaint. A review of the three violations alleged in the Complaint shows that although Respondent is in possession of monopoly power in the relevant markets, Complaint Counsel have failed to demonstrate that Respondent engaged in a pattern of exclusionary, anticompetitive conduct which subverted an open standards process, or that Respondent utilized such conduct to capture an unlawful monopoly in the technology-related markets. Analyzing the challenged conduct under established principles of economics and antitrust law and utilizing the preponderance of evidence standard, Complaint Counsel have not proven the elements necessary to support a finding of liability."

Citing from the Federal Court of Appeals:
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NSD/RMBS/msoA7__.pdf

"In sum, the district court erred in its construction of each of the disputed terms. In light of the revised claim construction, this court vacates the grant of JMOL of noninfringement and remands for the district court to reconsider infringement." "In sum, substantial evidence does not support the jury's verdict that Rambus breached its duties under the EIA/JEDEC policy. Infineon did not show the first element of a Virginia fraud action and therefore did not prove fraud associated with the SDRAM standard. No reasonable jury could find otherwise. The district court erred in denying JMOL of no fraud on the SDRAM verdict. Because of these holdings, the new trial and injunction issues are moot."

Collapse -

nice TRUE story

by atridi In reply to nice story

Don't want to believe rambus.org (BTW that's NOT the company site - its run independently. Their site is rambus.com)? OK, pick the one you find most credible!

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/display/20040102075459.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2005/April/05_at_207.htm
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27993
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2005/tc20051031_874429.htm

Excess capacity will only bring down price when the owners of that capacity aren't conspiring together!

Collapse -

just because

by Dr Dij In reply to nice TRUE story

they had patents now considered valid on dram
doesn't mean they are capable of making and marketing another product at a price / performance consumers wanted.

and they voted with their wallets.
I saw the prices when rdram was being sold, and the incestuous relationship with intel who only sold rdram MB's and chipsets.

they were free to negotiate with the fab owners if they didn't have their own, and get best price they could. the fact that either they couldnt get a good price or could and were making ridiculous amounts of money (because rdram was so expensive) didn't endear them to consumers.

Collapse -

So.....arno?

by Mickster269 In reply to Rambus: Hidden Gem

Are you wanting me to buy stock in Rambus?

You aren't some Nigerian Prince, are you?

Collapse -

I'm not arno...

by atridi In reply to So.....arno?

...so I don't know what he wants from you, but I'll tell you one thing - he's right. You are sitting here bashing a company that developed a technology that every one of you is using if you have a computer built after 1997. It took longer to bring to market, up until recently worked worse, and cost you MUCH more than if you had gotten that technology legally.

You, my friends, have been duped, but not by Rambus. If you would do a little research you would see that there are some slimy people in this whole business, but it's not Rambus. If you're interested in getting the facts, you could start here:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/display/20040102075459.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2005/April/05_at_207.htm
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27993
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2005/tc20051031_874429.htm

Collapse -

I was just wondering ...

by Mickster269 In reply to I'm not arno...

Why it seems that the message he posted focused in part on the stock price?

"Years of corruption at the level of organizations, lawfirms, and even judges have led to turbulent stock action, down from above $100 to below $4...

"As soon as settlements are signed, this stock might jump to well above $100, many believe it will hit $500 within the next few years."

Is he pumping the price of the stock? The general tone of his original post sounds more like a shill for Rambus than a techie.

Atrid, it's nice to see your very first posts here at TR are also related to Rambus. This must be very important to you.

Call me jaded, but I took this message to be a selling of stock attempt.

Collapse -

Wha!?

by jmgarvin In reply to Rambus: Hidden Gem

$500/share!!?? Ya, and pigs might fly out of my butt....

Really, I could care less about RAMBUS, they are a day late and a dollar short. It's too expensive and too kludgy for me to really care anymore. If it came out in 2000, then I'd care...but not now.

Oh and as a side note: What is the stock value of Rambus now ;-)

Collapse -

Where have you been?

by atridi In reply to Wha!?

"If it came out in 2000, then I'd care...but not now."

It WAS out in 2000. That's what makes Rambus so amazing! They had DDR performance IN 1990! Even Rambus doesn't advocate RDRAM now. They now have XDR, which is many time faster than DDR! You can get a close look at it in Sony's PS3 this fall or in a line of new high end servers from IBM.

"Oh and as a side note: What is the stock value of Rambus now"

Just under $40 as I write this. Not bad, considering it was under $11 just last October. I guess some folks know a good thing when they see it!

Collapse -

not ddr performance, hype

by Dr Dij In reply to Where have you been?

read the tomshardware reviews. rdram was hype.
800 mhz bus speed times 8 bits made it run slower than 133 mhz dram x 32 bits

Collapse -

No they didn't

by jmgarvin In reply to Where have you been?

They faked the funk and got busted by every benchmark.

Is XDR many times faster than DDR? At this point, who cares. It costs too much and does too little. They are behind the technological power curve and I could care less.

Ya, $40/share. You said it could jumps to $500/share....so somehow, magically stock could become 12.5 times more valuable over night....sure...

$100/share seems a little large too...what is this 1998? Is Montly Fool talking about iOmega...uh RAMBUS?

Related Discussions

Related Forums