Memory Makers Settle Antitrust Lawsuit
By Ed Oswald | Published May 11, 2006, 4:00 PM
Three PC memory manufacturers will pay $160 million to settle an antitrust case brought against them by small to medium sized businesses that purchased chips directly from the companies. Not all have settled, however, with five other defendants set to appear in court in February 2007.
Samsung will pay $67 million, and Infineon $21 million in the class action suit. Hynix would also pay $73 million, but its settlement is not expected to gain approval by the court until next week. In the end, lawyers say total damages could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
The case is separate from, although related to, an antitrust probe that the Justice Department launched, alleging price fixing from 1999 through 2002. Altogether Samsung, Infineon, Hynix and Elpida paid some $731 million in fines, and some executives were sent to jail.
There is also a class-action lawsuit for consumers who purchased PCs with the company's chips included during the same period; that case is still ongoing. A class-action suit that was filed on behalf of international companies was dismissed by a federal judge.
Sun Microsystems has also filed an individual lawsuit against the companies in January of this year.
Crucial is just the brand name for Micron Tech. Micron tech makes the chips, and owns crucial.
Score: 0
|Heh..used to Work for Micron..back when they sold computers.
Ahh...those were the days.
Working in the callcenter, going to lunch at Stonehouse, drinking heavily....
Yeah... what a blast.
Score: 0
|Do Crucial and Kingston make their own chips? The Kingston stuff I have here uses Infineon chips, not their own.
EDIT: Actually, I just found some Kingston using their own chips, and some more that is unmarked (so I assume it's theirs).
Score: 0
|I don't see crucial on this list, or kingston, for that matter..
Anyone know who the other 5 defendants are?
Score: 0
|Was RAMBUS around then? I know they weren't friendly with the other chip makers, but that doesn't mean they weren't interested in cheating. :P
Score: 0
|Hmm, it seems after a little research that the original lawsuit was a private one that did not specify which memory makers were being sued. It was also a suit for unspecified damages, and the timeframes for which seem to vary between the reports.
Someone is being deliberately vague. :P
Score: 0
|