Tuesday, July 27th 2010
ITC Issues Notice of Final Determination in Rambus Matter Regarding NVIDIA Products
Rambus Inc., one of the world's premier technology licensing companies, today announced that the International Trade Commission (ITC) issued its notice of final determination in the action brought by Rambus against NVIDIA Corporation and other Respondents. In its notice, the ITC has affirmed the findings of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), with certain modifications. The final determination, including such modifications, has yet to be released.
On November 6, 2008, Rambus filed a complaint with the ITC requesting an investigation pertaining to certain NVIDIA products. The complaint sought an exclusion order barring the importation, sale for importation, and sale after importation of products that infringe nine of Rambus' patents. The accused products include graphics processors, application processors, media and communications processors, and chip sets which incorporate infringing memory controllers. The complaint named NVIDIA as a proposed Respondent, as well as companies whose products incorporate the accused NVIDIA products and are imported into the United States. These Respondents include: Asustek Computer Inc. and Asus Computer International, BFG Technologies, Biostar Microtech and Biostar Microtech International Corp., Diablotek Inc., EVGA Corp., G.B.T. Inc. and Giga-Byte Technology Co., Hewlett-Packard, MSI Computer Corp. and Micro-Star International Co., Palit Multimedia Inc. and Palit Microsystems Ltd., Pine Technology (Macao Commercial Offshore) Ltd., and Sparkle Computer Co. Four of the asserted patents were later withdrawn from the investigation.
An evidentiary hearing on the asserted patents was held before the ALJ on October 13-20, 2009. On January 22, 2010, the ALJ issued an initial determination finding two Rambus patents to be not valid. The ALJ further determined three Rambus (Barth) patents valid, enforceable and infringed by the Respondents.
Today, Rambus received notice of the ITC's intent to issue a Limited Exclusion Order barring the importation of Respondents' infringing products into the United States, as well as Cease and Desist Orders barring identified Respondents from selling any infringing products that were previously imported into the United States. Under the Limited Exclusion Order, the infringing products may be imported and sold during a 60-day Presidential review period if Respondents post a bond. The Commission has specified that the bond amount is 2.65% of the entered value of the subject imports.
"The ITC's decision is another demonstration of the value of our continued commitment to innovation," said Thomas Lavelle, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus. "We are extremely pleased with the ITC's decision to issue a Limited Exclusion Order, signaling the strength of our innovation efforts beyond the Farmwald-Horowitz patents of our founders. The value of our patented inventions has been recognized by our current licensees, and we will continue our efforts to license others."
Rambus management will discuss this decision during a special conference call tomorrow at 6:00 a.m. PT. The call will be webcast and can be accessed through the Rambus website. A replay will be available following the call on Rambus' Investor Relations website or for one week at the following numbers: (800) 642-1687(domestic) or (706) 645-9291(international) with ID# 90764352.
On November 6, 2008, Rambus filed a complaint with the ITC requesting an investigation pertaining to certain NVIDIA products. The complaint sought an exclusion order barring the importation, sale for importation, and sale after importation of products that infringe nine of Rambus' patents. The accused products include graphics processors, application processors, media and communications processors, and chip sets which incorporate infringing memory controllers. The complaint named NVIDIA as a proposed Respondent, as well as companies whose products incorporate the accused NVIDIA products and are imported into the United States. These Respondents include: Asustek Computer Inc. and Asus Computer International, BFG Technologies, Biostar Microtech and Biostar Microtech International Corp., Diablotek Inc., EVGA Corp., G.B.T. Inc. and Giga-Byte Technology Co., Hewlett-Packard, MSI Computer Corp. and Micro-Star International Co., Palit Multimedia Inc. and Palit Microsystems Ltd., Pine Technology (Macao Commercial Offshore) Ltd., and Sparkle Computer Co. Four of the asserted patents were later withdrawn from the investigation.
An evidentiary hearing on the asserted patents was held before the ALJ on October 13-20, 2009. On January 22, 2010, the ALJ issued an initial determination finding two Rambus patents to be not valid. The ALJ further determined three Rambus (Barth) patents valid, enforceable and infringed by the Respondents.
Today, Rambus received notice of the ITC's intent to issue a Limited Exclusion Order barring the importation of Respondents' infringing products into the United States, as well as Cease and Desist Orders barring identified Respondents from selling any infringing products that were previously imported into the United States. Under the Limited Exclusion Order, the infringing products may be imported and sold during a 60-day Presidential review period if Respondents post a bond. The Commission has specified that the bond amount is 2.65% of the entered value of the subject imports.
"The ITC's decision is another demonstration of the value of our continued commitment to innovation," said Thomas Lavelle, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus. "We are extremely pleased with the ITC's decision to issue a Limited Exclusion Order, signaling the strength of our innovation efforts beyond the Farmwald-Horowitz patents of our founders. The value of our patented inventions has been recognized by our current licensees, and we will continue our efforts to license others."
Rambus management will discuss this decision during a special conference call tomorrow at 6:00 a.m. PT. The call will be webcast and can be accessed through the Rambus website. A replay will be available following the call on Rambus' Investor Relations website or for one week at the following numbers: (800) 642-1687(domestic) or (706) 645-9291(international) with ID# 90764352.
33 Comments on ITC Issues Notice of Final Determination in Rambus Matter Regarding NVIDIA Products
Honestly, that is what Rambus has done. I never see a single shred of news about any new product from them, yet I swear I've seen at least 3 different lawsuits over ancient patents that everyone in the computer industry has been using freely for years. I despise companies that allow their patents to be used by other companies long enough for the other company to become big, then sues them to try and extort money. If they had a problem with nVidia using their patents, why not sue them when nVidia first started using them? Why wait until nVidia is one of the biggest names in the computer industry?
I mean look at their lawsuit history since 2000:
Samsung
Infineon - Rambus was found quilty of fraud related to this case, IIRC.
Micron - Rambus was found quilty of fraud related to this case, IIRC.
Hynix - Rambus was found quilty of fraud related to this case, IIRC.
Hynix(Again)
Nanya
Inotera
Infineon(Again) - Rambus was found to have shredded documents relating to the case prior to the hearing. Fraud again - Case dismissed - again...
nvidia
And in this time, they've been investigated at least twice for anti-trust issues, and found quilty at least once. And in fact, the EU is actively investigating them for "patent ambush" which is knowingly allowing a technology to become an industry standard without disclosing you own the patents, then suing as many people in the industry as possible.
Now lets look at the amazing products they've come up with since 2000:
XDRAM - Nobody wants it.
*Crickets Chirp*
Nvidia just didn't want to have to pay for using the technology. Obviously the courts agreed and ruled in favor of Rambus.
AMD renewed their patent license agreement with Rambus in March of this year.
I would agree with you, had they spoke up right away before DDR/DDR2/DDR3 became industry standards. But they just sat back, let them become industry standards, knowing full well once the industry had no choice but to continue to use them, they would sue to get royalties. Some companies just lay down and take that as acceptable, some don't.
What matters is how long they waited to start trying to enforce those patents. They purposely waited until the products that infringed on their patents became industry standards instead of speaking up when the technologies were first being introduced.
And yes, they are all suing eachother, but the difference is that everyone else is actually putting out product and they don't have a mile long list of different companies they've sued, and Rambus seems to solely live off lawsuits with little actual contribution to the computer industry.
Edit: yes, nobody wants it indeed.