RSSFTC Rules Rambus Monopolized DRAM
By Ed Oswald | Published August 2, 2006, 1:33 PM
In a unanimous decision, the Federal Trade Commission found memory chip maker Rambus liable for monopolizing the market through its conduct concerning four memory technologies that were used in dynamic random access memory (DRAM) chips.
The FTC found Rambus withheld information from the Joint Electron Device Engineering Council, a standards group.
According to the agency's opinion, Rambus waited until its technology was included in the JEDEC DRAM standard before attempting to solicit royalty payments from companies who used the standard. When companies balked at licensing, Rambus then sued the companies for patent infringement.
"Rambus's conduct significantly contributed to JEDEC's choice of Rambus's technologies for incorporation in the JEDEC DRAM standards and to JEDEC's failure to secure assurances regarding future royalty rates - which, in turn, significantly contributed to Rambus's acquisition of monopoly power," the FTC said in its decision.
The FTC rejected claims by the chipmaker that JEDEC selected Rambus technologies for their superiority, and that competitors weren't locked into the DRAM standard once it was approved. "These claims fail, both as a matter of fact and as a matter of law," it argued.
To allow Rambus to continue its patent enforcement would mean the regulator would have to look past the company's exclusionary conduct, which it refused to do. Rambus attorney's disputed the claims of the FTC, saying the company complies with JEDEC disclosure policies.
Rambus said the decision will be appealed to the U.S. Appellate Court at a later date.
Under the FTC ruling, Rambus is prevented from enforcing any patent involving JEDEC-compliant products before its withdrawal from the standards body. Additionally, any licensing agreement as a result of this dispute would no longer be valid.
The decision is the latest move in a four-year battle between the FTC and Rambus. In 2002, the regulator first charged the chipmaker with violation of antitrust laws for its failure to disclose information to JEDEC. However, Rambus won on appeal from a FTC administrative judge. The agency appealed, and the topic was brought before the full commission.
Now if you could get the FTC to apply this same logic and methodoligy to Digital Rights Management and the related proprietary concepts you would have something...*laughs
Score: 0
|A deserved ruling. Never hated another technology company more than this one (no, not even Microsoft). They based their business model in enforcing a dubious patent portfolio, that now is being challenged by the FTC. :)
Score: 0
|If they with held information and influenced people to make it a standard so they can make a fortune they deserve whatever punishment they get.
Now off topic as most of the posts below daytonlowell quit whinning that microsoft is a monopoly because they are not you are free to install any OS you want if your going to say not enough software for other OSes thats not Microsofts fault developers don't want to write for another OS if Microsoft even tried to stop them you know how fast that would end up in court seeking millions plus fines for breaking the law.
As you pointed out below Windows comes on most prebuilt computers gee i wonder why lets see could it be thats what the majority of people want plus system builders want an easy to use OS that runs their programs aswell(see what i said about developers above)
The reason microsoft is so sucessfull(or monopoly as you put it) is because most people don't know there are alternatives out there because the Linux geeks(sorry couldn't help it) do not make enough of an effort to promote it and it's not like they don't have any big companies behind them to atleast do some advertising like when i was a kid i remember seeing tons of Windows adds on TV and that is why Microsoft is king by showing people computers can be fun and not just for work and before anyone mentions vic 20s comidor 64s ect ect ect what did they do to permote themselves
other than sit in a corner in stores like radio shack where only the geeks knew about them.
Even if Apple was to actualy advertise like they do with the ipod especialy now with bootcamp as a feature they could gain market share but same as the Linux people to lazy to actualy get out there and and show the people there are more choices than windows out there.
Puts on bullet and flame full body suit for insulting Linux and Mac people;)
Score: 0
|Will adimit being partialy wrong on the Mac advertising before someone points it out in the Apple patches thread someone mentioned there is a Mac commercial in the UK.
Anybody know of any video links for it never seen a Mac commercial before(perferably english)
Score: 0
|smart thinking but why so many people miss the concepts
leaving ALL company names and products out of the way for now, there were so many people/products that were made with certain markets targetted at the right/wrong time.
I don't think what I said was confusing, but let's make this easy example...Company A makes product A, and markets it to group A. Group A is only 500 units large. They succeed, yay. Company B makes product B and markets to Group B...Group B is 1 million units. Group B's pool grows exponentially, whereas Group A might not at all.
Company A looks at Company B and how many they are selling, but doesn't actually look at the marketing. Company A tries to take product A and sells to Group B, it won't succeed. Company B takes Product B and alters it to Product BA and then targets that to Group A but also let's Group B they can use Product BA fairly simply. Company B grows and prospers.
Then there's the anomaly Company C. Company C makes product C for Group C and will never change, grow or adapt. Company C thumbs it's nose at Company A and B, as well as Group A and B...even does it to it's own Group C if their eyes start wandering.
Company C's poor executive decisions linger, quarters go by, profits decline, users decline, Company C envies B and what little A might have but still won't evolve. C then says, ok ok, we'll take C and market it to A and B and tell them they were stupid. Nobody buys.
etc etc
It's all about corporate decision making...goes a long way.
Score: 0
|try this: http://www.apple.com/
These comercial are only in the middle of front page.
Score: 0
|Everyone on BN is ****in Microsoft lovers. They all hate when someone say a true fact about an article, this article is about Monopolizing, which Micrsoft is doing, but yet i'm the guy off subject.
Score: 0
|You are off subject because the company accused of being a monopoly is NOT MICROSOFT. Just because the word MONOPOLY is used doesnt mean it is automatically about microsoft. I am not a microsoft lover, in fact I dont like several of their practices, but I know when comments are appropriate
Score: 0
|"Everyone on BN is ****in Microsoft lovers."
Tommorrow it will read:
"Everyone on BN is ****in Microsoft haters."
heh
Score: 0
|I kinda get a taste of Southpark reading that
damn dude...seriously
It is off topic. It's like reading the article, than saying I'm all hot and sexy. Yeah that might be true and it is really, but damn, what does that have to do with rambus being the monopoly that it is...not mentioning other chip makers.
Now see, if you talked about the entire mem chip industry being a mono, it'd be on track. Because they are like gangs, they team up to regulate and jack their prices when needed. But saying I'm all hawt and sexy, while true...reminder, does not stay on topic.
Score: 0
|How about an on topic comment???
Here is one. I am glad the FTC finally brought it to RAMBUS. There memory sucks except for XDR which looks to have potential but they are picky about who can make it which makes it very expensive and they certainly don't play fair. Finally the FTC is looking out for the consumer.
Score: 0
|Ignore the trolls.... they are seeking the attention they did not get from their parents.
Score: 0
|hummm.....so Rambus is monopolizing but Microsoft isn't.
Score: 0
|Why dont you microsoft haters get a friggin life. This article has NOTHING to do with microsoft. Get off your hating horses and post when its relevant to the article
Score: 0
|They have nothing better to do except sit on BN waiting for their chance to bash MS.
There was a news today that Apple released some security fix, and no comment yet. If it's MS release a fix, hater will be all over it.
Score: 0
|Nah, I've posted my two cents on that article now.
I decided to do a bit of Apple bashing for once...
Score: 0
|Man, you're a loser.
Score: 0
|Do you want some cheese with that whine?
Score: 0
|O so i'm wrong. So if you murder someone and Bill Gates murders someone and only you get caught, then its ok. Thats fine i see how it is.
Score: 0
|cuz i'm right?
Score: 0
|Although the article is not about Microsoft it IS about monopolizing the market(Microsoft's Windowss Operating System is sold on almost all Computers on the market, if u want a computer, u GOTTA GO MICRO$OFT).
Score: 0
|Although thats the way it seems i don't often "bash" on Micro$oft. I like most of the Software and don't dis-like where they are going with Windows Vista, but I don't believe monopolizing the Operating System market should be allowed. Monopolizing is agaisnt the law, thats all.
Score: 0
|Yes it is against the law. but, again THIS ARTICLE IS NOT ABOUT MICROSOFT OR ITS OPERATING SYSTEM TACTICS!
Score: 0
|Again, this is not about microsoft. This article is about RAMBUS. Learn to read and then comment
Score: 0
|Again, you miss the point. THIS ARTICLE IS NOT ABOUT MICROSOFT, its about RAMBUS. If you hate microsoft so much that you have to come into an article which has nothing to do with them ASIDE from the the fact that the word monopoly is used, then I suggest you find something more to fill your time as you are a sad sad excuse for a person.
Score: 0
|Sure it is, Microsoft ran the OS inside the memory that is made by the company that was on trial here.
See, absolutely on topic.
heh
Score: 0
|I see your point! comment withdrawn. Thanks for putting me in my place fewt :)
Score: 0
|I knew you'd come around.
heh
Score: 0
|