Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (106) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: JohnYossarianJr Three stars, 500 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 143730  
Subject: Re: Motley Fool Article hitting the wires Date: 6/14/2005 7:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 117
Rich,
I'm trying to figure out why you wrote the kind of article you did about the Rambus-Samsung litigation. Rambus designs high-speed chip interfaces. Licensing their designs is what makes money for them. I don't think anyone including Rambus would claim, as you assert, that Rambus invented DDR2, only that aspects of it appropriate Rambus' intellectual property without due compensation. As much as it costs Rambus and its shareholders to defend that intellectual property in the short term, the long-term alternative is presumably more costly.

With regard specifically to Samsung, to whom you refer as "a good player in the Rambus drama", the situation is not as simple as you apparently believe. Witness the situation with Tessera Technologies, a company that designs chip packaging and licenses those designs to the industry. Samsung licenses some of those designs and simply tramples Tessera over the remainder. Why do they license some but not others? Arguably because it ups the ante for Tessera (or Rambus) in determining where to draw the line, a decision that is much simpler with a company that refuses any licenses. Additionally, this partial licensing approach allows Samsung to hold that any infringement a court may find against them is not willful, thereby sparing them paying extra damages. But then you did say they are a good player and not a good guy in the Rambus drama. Maybe I misunderstood your point.

The fifth paragraph of your article discusses Rambus, Jedec, Samsung, the FTC, and document destruction. After airing Samsung's complaints and the current basis of the FTC appeal, you glibly note that an administrative law judge threw out the case last year. Essentially, he found it incredible that a standards setting body would believe that an intellectual property company would not be seeking remuneration for their property. Further, he found that people running Jedec and a number of its members were guilty of behavior worse than anything Rambus was accused of. You might find his findings of fact and his decision interesting. Of course, it would take some time and effort to read it. It's certainly easier simply to claim that "Rambus loves legal wrangling", is a "sue-happy company" or that "The lawyers must have gotten bored." Having taken the time to write this shoddy piece, you might do the penance of at least skimming the FTC decision. I believe it's still available on the FTC's or Rambus' website.

I suppose I'm particularly surprised that a cop would write such a piece of blather. If someone called in a B&E, would you tell them to negotiate with the burglar? "Let him take the jewelry and silver. See if he'll leave your cash and credit cards." The Motley Fool is an interesting if inconsistent place. The Rambus message board is one of its crown jewels. A little trolling there might have given you the insight to write about how Rambus' "customers", Micron in particular, have hijacked the FTC, how the FTC took up the case against Rambus after a firm that employed high-level former FTC employees was retained by Micron, how an FTC filing was apparently composed by one of its former interns retained at the time by Micron. You might have written about how, and maybe why, Rambus never got an infringement trial and was essentially railroaded by Judge Robert Payne into a really weak settlement with Infineon. You might have written about the truly offensive self-indulgence of Rambus management in rewarding themselves with a wealth of options while nothing by way of outcomes yet appears to warrant reward.

There are a lot of things you could have written about but you wrote a lazy and dishonest piece. Shame on you. My suggestion is that you review some of the over 112,000 posts on the Rambus message board, or at least read the FTC's initial decision, before composing another such shoddy piece. When the Fool advertises that it's all about "Fools helping Fools" I don't think yours was the kind of foolishness they had in mind. But whether or not, it's a poor reflection on TMF that this saw the light of day. If you're not willing to do the work, maybe you could get WD Crotty back on the beat.

No offense intended.

Sincerely,
Yossarian, aka Bob West
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (106) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement