Home > Standards Blog

Advanced Search 

Welcome to ConsortiumInfo.org
Wednesday, September 17 2014 @ 08:43 PM CDT

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Rambus Redux: The FTC Tries One Last Time (and so do I)
Authored by: Andy Updegrove on Monday, December 15 2008 @ 06:36 AM CST
Rolv,

One need simply read the opinions.  When Rambus has won, it has been because of factors not related to the fact that it intended to practice deception - such as being able to persuade a fact finder that the JEDEC IPR policy was too vague.  However, using that as an excuse after the fact does not erase the documents that came to light during the litigation that indicated that Rambus did, in fact, understand its obligations, and did, in fact, intend to game the system.  Other elements in the case do not make these facts disappear, and it is Rambus's intent and strategy that I am concerned with.  If everyone acted as Rambus did in standard setting, you and I might not even be able to engage in an electronic exchange like this - because the standards wouldn't exist to enable it.

And the answer to your question is no, I have no stake in this dispute of any sort, nor am I a stockholder in any party, nor is any party a client of mine.  My filing of amicus briefs over the years has always been on a pro bono basis.  So I have spent many, many hours supporting the FTC's efforts as a matter of principle, and not for any economic gain.

  -  Andy
[ Parent | # ]