Computer memory maker Rambus today filed a $1 billion
anti-trust lawsuit against four of its competitors, accusing each of
conspiracy to drive its RDRAM technology out of the market.
The Los Altos, Calif.-based company names Micron Technology, Infineon Technologies, Siemens and Korea's Hynix in the 36-page complaint filed in the
Superior Court of the State of California in San Francisco. The suit
outlines the charges as conspiracy to restrict output and price
fixing; conspiracy to monopolize the marketplace; intentional
interference with prospective economic advantage; and unfair
competition.
Wife of Rambus CEO outed as message board troll | The Register::
Aug 6, 2007 Harvard rivals claim smoking gun in Facebook 'code theft' case · AMD takes a $950m EC accuses Rambus of 'patent ambush' (23 August 2007)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/06/rambus_ceo_wife/HOME |
Patent Holdup and Oligopsonistic Collusion in Standard Setting ::
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTMLNothing in the section 1 of Sherman Act implies that horizontal price. fixing by either buyers or sellers becomes lawful when rivals manifest their
http://innovationforum.gmu.edu/papers/patent_holdup.pdfHOME |
The lawsuit stems partially from a patent lawsuit Rambus levied
against Infineon as well as a separate investigation by the Federal
Trade Commission, which is looking into charges of collusion in the
international DRAM (define) manufacturing sector.
"From substantial written evidence already in the public record, we
believe that these memory manufacturers colluded illegally, thereby
limiting consumer choice and depriving our RDRAM products of the
opportunity to compete fairly in the marketplace," said John Danforth,
senior vice president and general counsel for Rambus.
Danforth told internetnews.com that the overlap between
Rambus' case and the FTC's is a string of e-mails between the four
companies, including one from a Micron executive that he and Rambus
"essentially believe admits to conspiracy to price fixing." Phrases
like "RDRAM killing" and "the plan is working" come up in some of the
e-mails.
SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT PROSECUTE MONOPOLIES? Maurice E. Stucke Abstract::
fines levied against members of the most notorious price fixing cartels may Rambus, 2006 WL 2330117 (“[P]roof of the deceptive conduct alleged in
http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=maurice_stuckeHOME |
Defending “The Last Man Standing”: Trench Lessons from the 2008 ::
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTMLWhile the defense conceded the existence of price fixing, we sought to create “distance” the accused and the. “inner circle” of. Korean executives.
http://www.abanet.org/antitrust/at-source/08/06/Jun08-FullSource.pdfHOME |
Micron and Infineon issued statements refuting Rambus' claims.
Representatives with Siemens and Hynix were not immediately available
for comment.
"This is yet another example highlighting Rambus' pattern of using
litigation as its only real business model," Infineon spokesman
Christoph Liedtke said in a statement.
Texas Law Review::
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTMLCBS, 441 U.S. 1, 4 (1979) (regarding a price-fixing suit filed against BMI and .. Press Release, FTC, FTC Issues Final Opinion and Order in Rambus
http://www.utexas.edu/law/journals/tlr/assets/current/LemleyWeiser.Proof.Final.pdfHOME |
Legalbrief eLaw & Management - 19 July 2006::
Watson has accused a 'Cape info tourist Web site' of registering 'all related . Litigation: US Government to sue chipmakers over alleged price-fixing
http://www.legalbrief.co.za/publication/archives.php?mode=archive&p_id=E-Law&issueno=1141&format=htmlHOME |
"Rambus failed in the marketplace because of excessive
manufacturing costs and minimal RDRAM demand," Dave Parker, Micron's
director of corporate communications, added. "Several memory
manufacturers, including the world's largest, continue to produce
RDRAM products sufficient to meet its limited, worldwide market
demand. It is unfortunate that Rambus is trying to blame the market
failure of its RDRAM technology on others, like Micron, who ultimately
responded to marketplace demands."
Instead, Micron believes that Rambus is attempting to deflect
attention away from its own ongoing suit with the FTC.
In its lawsuit against Rambus, the FTC alleged that Rambus
intentionally deceived others in the DRAM industry to undermine the
efforts by the Joint Electron Devices Engineering Council (JEDEC).
The FTC accused Rambus of deliberately failing to disclose critical
information to the standards group in an attempt to gain a monopoly
over the DRAM industry and extort exorbitant royalties from DRAM
manufacturers and consumers.
A retrial date for the Rambus v. Infineon case had been set for
June 10 in Virginia, but Federal Judge Robert Payne said there are a
number of pretrial issues that remain to be resolved and postponed the
proceedings until sometime in the fall.
 CA Delays Earnings, Adjusts $9 Million
 Technical Analysis: Nasdaq Still Stymied |
HOME
PRINT
Add to favorites