Rambus in Violation of Monopoly Laws

surfingmarmot writes to tell us that in a recent ruling the Federal Trade Commission declared that Rambus had unlawfully monopolized four computer memory technology markets. From the article: "In an opinion by Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour, the Commission found that, through a course of deceptive conduct, Rambus was able to distort a critical standard-setting process and engage in an anticompetitive 'hold up' of the computer memory industry. The Commission held that Rambus's acts of deception constituted exclusionary conduct under Section 2 of the Sherman Act and contributed significantly to Rambus's acquisition of monopoly power in the four relevant markets. The Commission has ordered additional briefings to determine the appropriate remedy for 'the substantial competitive harm that Rambus's course of deceptive conduct has inflicted.'"

This, Of Course, Suprises No One

[ackthpt]

How many years have we been following this travesty? Seems like 12, but my own (non-SDRAM) memory is a bit fuzzy with age. I recall battles on many fronts, in Europe some shopping for courts in Italy by Rambus while pursuing Infineon, suits in the USA in Virginia which were found against Rambus for the very activity of submarining the patents at JEDEC (Keeping their traps shut while JEDEC members adopted technology standards which played directly into their hands, in violation of the spirit and agreements with JEDEC), then fines against Rambus reduced, then overturned and years of watching Rambus very nearly pull the whole thing off. Finally, the FTC arrives at a decision. Of course, all players in the SDRAM game have been a bit dirty for years, with price fixing and such (isn't it a wonder someone actually makes money on this stuff?) I suppose the bottom-line question is: Will the FTC revoke the patents? (In any case, you know by now that Rambus is actually an Intellectual Property company which is chiefly legal teams, and anything will be appealed.)

A Pro-Rambus site is here [rambus.org]

Who cares?

[SatanicPuppy]

Their absurd pricing has already sent them out of the market...I actually threw away a decent computer because the cost of getting more RAM was too high a percentage of what getting a better computer would have cost. Rambus was always so expensive, that it was installed in such small quantities...All the computers I've ever used with rambus seemed crappy because they generally had half the ram of their non-rambus peers.

This is just icing on the cake 'o suck they baked for themselves with their crappy behavior.

Bad guys vs bad guy

[renoX]

So on one hand we have memory manufacturers who have colluded to maintain high prices of memory, on the other hand, we have Rambus which has used submarine patents to gain humongous royalties subverting JEDEC process.

Surprisingly in this case apparently the FTC and the governements appears to do the right thing (if very slowly) and will (hopefully) punish all these crooks.
Of course in the meantime consumers have payed more that they should have and the punishement will not change this..

Re:Bad guys vs bad guy

[ackthpt]

Surprisingly in this case apparently the FTC and the governements appears to do the right thing (if very slowly) and will (hopefully) punish all these crooks.

Todays Lesson: Evil transpires quickly, while Good takes a while to get up, pull it's boots on and do something about it. Whomever is in power may accelerated or retard either.

Of course in the meantime consumers have payed more that they should have and the punishement will not change this..

When is this a new thing? I predict the oil companies will be sued in a few years time for activities they are doing now, that the US Federal Government is not noticing. Nobody ever gets their money back.

you're still paying them

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Of course nobody buys Rambus memory anymore. However, they were successful in extorting licensing fees from a number of other memory manufacturers for "infringing on their IP". So you're indirectly paying Rambus through higher prices for memory. Hopefully, this means the extortion will stop. Rambus can then go back to attempting to sue their potential clients (a la SCO) in order to scam additional licensing revenue. Stick a fork in Rambus if this ruling holds up.

Water Under The Bridge

[mpapet]

American markets are divided, prices are fixed, supplies are intentionally constrained by global competitors without any punishable Sherman Act violation. They simply do the negotiations in a country that looks the other way. American office doesn't ever know.

Rambus got penalized because they abused the priviledge. Period.

Only shows that the legal system is broken

[gweihir]

It has been clear for many years now that Rambus lives by patent fraud. They steal ideas thet are being formulated by others and patent then. They then pressure companies with threat of lawsuits.

This works because
a) Patent law is broken. It urgently needs repercussions for fraudulent patents. It urgently needs easier ways to overturn fraudulent patents. It urgently needs to be harder to file a fraudulent patent than to overturn one. And filing a fraudulent patent urgently needs to land the perpetrator in prison.

b) The lawsuit process is broken. If somebody like Rambus can create a real danger to other businesses with their morally reprehensible and most likely illegal practices, then there is something fundamentally wrong. There have been other instances of this abuse of the legal system recently. Blackberry and SCO come to mind. This kind of abuse urgently needs a risk for those conducting it to land them in prison.

All in all, the US legal and patent system now seems to be a primary factor in hindering economic growth and innovation. Please fix that system now.

Side note: If this continues and the EU does not follow this stupidity (a possibility but not a certainity), then the US might just find its place in the global scheme of things adjusted to a place they will find rather uncomfortable.

Re:Front page filled with crimes against computing

[saskboy]

The computer industry has changed. A 5 year old computer now can still do most things the aging population of computer users wants to do - email, printing, downloading music.
In 2000, a 5 year old computer was much less worthy of keeping around, but I'd use a 400MHz Celeron in a pinch these days, and so would hundreds of thousands of people who have nothing close to even that.

Imagine being told that Quick Cam needs to be thrown away since Windows Vista won't authorize its use because it isn't PVP compliant and might be used to circumvent DRM.