My question is this since they are working with the HBM tech or at least making a controller to work with it have they also licensed themselves to be able to make products work with the HBM2e memory. I only ask because of this companies shading dealings in the past where they sat in the JEDEC meetings years ago then left quickly put out a whole bunch of patents without actually making a product and then sat and waited until memory companies started making and releasing memory products based on the JEDEC spec and Rumpbus then quickly sued pretty much every company they could to suck money from something they basically stole.
To me at least this company is the scum of the scum and I would personally never buy anything they had anything to do with. END OF RANT Ok one more even scum of the earth types most likely think this company is lower than scum...lol
rocky12345, you're wrong. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Here are the findings of facts:
rocky12345, you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about:
<< In sum, substantial evidence does not support the jury’s verdict that Rambus breached its duties under the EIA/JEDEC policy. Infineon did not show the first element of a Virginia fraud action and therefore did not prove fraud associated with the SDRAM standard. No reasonable jury could find otherwise. The district court erred in denying JMOL of no fraud on the SDRAM verdict. Because of these holdings, the new trial and injunction issues are moot. >>
<<Because Infineon did not show that Rambus had a duty to disclose before the DDRSDRAM standard-setting process formally began, the district court properly granted JMOL of no fraud in Rambus’s favor on the DDR-SDRAM verdict. >>
Too bad that there's some misinformed zealots here who have bitter feelings based on erroneous facts:
<<But that is not how this litigation, broadly conceived, begun. Micron sued Rambus for declaratory judgment on August 28, 2000 in Delaware. Hynix sued Rambus for declaratory judgment the next day here in San Jose, California. Persuasive circumstantial evidence suggests that Micron and Hynix coordinated their filing of the declaratory judgment lawsuits. See Conduct Trial Tr. 4006:8-4008:12 (Mar. 5, 2008) (former Hynix employee Farhad Tabrizi admitting to his belief in 2000 prior to litigation with Rambus that Hynix would litigate "to the end of Rambus company"); 5131:1-25; 5135:1-16 (Mar. 18, 2008) (testimony of Micron CEO Steve Appleton that he met with Hynix personnel in early August of 2000 and that he cancelled licensing meetings with Rambus to sue for declaratory judgment); 5633:16-5634:1 (Mar. 20, 2008) (testimony from Hynix employee D.S. Chung about licensing meetings Hynix scheduled with Rambus, then cancelled by suing for declaratory judgment); cf. Licensing Trial Tr. 420:24-423:6 (Sept. 24, 2008) (testimony of Samsung employee Jay Shim regarding joint defense agreement between Samsung, Hynix, Micron, and Infineon enteredinto in August 2000).>>
SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES – 09/23/2012 – Rambus Inc. (Nasdaq:RMBS), one of the world’s premier technology licensing companies, today announced that the judge for the Northern District of California (NDCA) has issued his decision in the matter with SK Hynix. The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte has found that the Rambus patents in this case are valid and infringed by SK Hynix and Rambus is entitled to receive royalty payments for past infringement based on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) rates.
“This is a positive result as it is consistent with what we’ve been seeking all along – reasonable compensation for the use of our patented inventions,” said Thomas Lavelle, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus. “We appreciate the Court’s extensive efforts in working through years of complex arguments. While this decision does not provide SK Hynix with a going-forward license, we are hopeful it will lead to putting this matter behind us completely and allow us to reach reasonable agreements.”
In his ruling, Judge Whyte found that Rambus executed its document retention practices during a time when it reasonably anticipated litigation, and thus willfully spoliated evidence, but also found that Rambus did not deliberately destroy documents it knew to be damaging. The parties have been ordered to provide briefs on the issue of the damages SK Hynix will need to pay Rambus.
Rambus management will discuss this decision during a special conference call on Monday, September 24, 2012 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: (855) 859-2056 (domestic) or (404) 537-3406 (international) with the ID# 34575979.
Background of the Matter
This case was originally filed by SK Hynix against Rambus in August 2000. The case was split into three separate phases with Rambus prevailing in all three phases. The first phase considered SK Hynix’s allegations that certain Rambus patents should be unenforceable under the doctrine of unclean hands and spoliation
drenxnx, very good point. But what's scary about some people is that their methodology of thought can be dangerous. I'm not saying just because of this but for any other important reason:
It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So - Mark Twain.
Would be nice for highly integrated systems (laptops, AIOs, and such, assuming the power consumption is kept in check), or if you could still expand the memory using regular DDR DIMMs. But this implies having more complexity on the IMC side. Also trying to fit another 4 dies (for 64GB of RAM) today on something like a 3700X would make for a crowded package.
Once again Rambus isnt making a product or service, they're making a patent to sue innovators. Rambus is a parasite on the industry and the world will be better when they disappear.
They are making a design which they patent and license to anyone who wants to use it. If they didn't license the design from RAMBUS they'd have to license it from someone else or design it themselves. Designing it themselves would mean hiring people with the expertise to do it. Apparently, RAMBUS is a lower cost, or higher quality, designer. It's a standard service that is a key part of the tech industry. It is performed by many companies and relied on by many companies that make products.
That's not entirely accurate. When you license a commercial IP block design from someone, its verified and tested. Its something tangible that is production quality. Its not just a block diagram and a patent. Otherwise what's to stop someone from printing out all the papers from ASPLOS/MICRO/ISCA and filing them all at the patent office and hoping it passes under the radar of the authors and selling it to 3rd parties as a "design" folks can license.
When you get a block from Syopsys or Cadence or other 3rd party IP design companies its usually pretty mature and maybe even taped out on a test chip to ensure it works.
tldr Avoid Rambus unless you want to spend more on lawyers than engineers
What facts? The fact that Rambus hasn't sued anybody in something like 20 years? Why do you his assertions that make no sense to be "facts"? You believe that Rambus are forcing people to buy their PHYs?
Please source me where you get the idea that Rambus's IP blocks are not verified and tested whereas others are. And even if so, it's not relevant, because if Rambus's blocks are not verified or tested then that is perfectly OK with their customers who choose them. I believe what I said was entirely accurate and what you said is just nonsense.
<<Rambus Announces Tapeout of GDDR6 Memory PHY on TSMC 7nm Process Technology Leading IP to support TSMC’s customers with AI, HPC, automotive and networking applications
SUNNYVALE and SANTA CLARA, Calif. – Jan. 30, 2019 >>
No tape outs? Why do you comment without understanding what you're commenting about?
Rambus Tapes Out 112G XSR SerDes PHY on Leading-edge 7nm Process Highlights:
Provides critical building block to deliver data for next-generation data center, networking, high-performance computing (HPC), artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) applications Delivers superior power, performance and area (PPA) for extra short reach (XSR) links with innovative architecture designed for leading-edge 7nm process node Expands SerDes PHY portfolio for 112G OIF-CEI industry standard
Yojimbo, thank you for your informed and intelligent comment.
I would think that individuals reading about technology would have high enough IQs to make informed and well thought out comments. But too bad that isn't the case in some instances. Some bring up old and misinformed biases that they just can't grow out of!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
42 Comments
Back to Article
azfacea - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
something something APU something somethingextide - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
They wouldn't need this though, AMD clearly have their own HBM memory controllers.JasonMZW20 - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
AMD licenses Synopsys HBM2 PHYs and controllers. At least, they did for Vega 10/20.https://www.synopsys.com/dw/ipdir.php?ds=dwc_hbm2
Kurosaki - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
Sue them!!!Sivar - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
Which JEDEC meeting did they steal this from?rocky12345 - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
You beat me to it because I was thinking the same thing.Spunjji - Thursday, March 12, 2020 - link
100%rocky12345 - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
My question is this since they are working with the HBM tech or at least making a controller to work with it have they also licensed themselves to be able to make products work with the HBM2e memory. I only ask because of this companies shading dealings in the past where they sat in the JEDEC meetings years ago then left quickly put out a whole bunch of patents without actually making a product and then sat and waited until memory companies started making and releasing memory products based on the JEDEC spec and Rumpbus then quickly sued pretty much every company they could to suck money from something they basically stole.To me at least this company is the scum of the scum and I would personally never buy anything they had anything to do with. END OF RANT Ok one more even scum of the earth types most likely think this company is lower than scum...lol
Yojimbo - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
They made their witchcraft with newts eyes and toad tongues and puppy dog tails. Beware!DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
rocky12345, you're wrong. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Here are the findingsof facts:
rocky12345, you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about:
<< In sum, substantial evidence does not support the jury’s verdict that Rambus
breached its duties under the EIA/JEDEC policy. Infineon did not show the first element of
a Virginia fraud action and therefore did not prove fraud associated with the SDRAM
standard. No reasonable jury could find otherwise. The district court erred in denying
JMOL of no fraud on the SDRAM verdict. Because of these holdings, the new trial and
injunction issues are moot. >>
<<Because Infineon did not show that Rambus had a duty to disclose before the DDRSDRAM standard-setting process formally began, the district court properly granted JMOL
of no fraud in Rambus’s favor on the DDR-SDRAM verdict. >>
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NSD/RMBS...
Yojimbo - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
Rambus shot my dog.surt - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
And by doing so, decreased the average level of evil of their actions.Sivar - Monday, March 9, 2020 - link
"And by doing so, decreased the average level of evil of their actions."This is mathematically sound even though shooting someone's dog is, in fact, evil.
PeachNCream - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
They probably did you a favor. Dogs are like...yuck!drexnx - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
the rambus chicanery with SDRAM was literally 20 years ago, time to move onjeremyshaw - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
Yes, it's time to move on and never use RAMBUS ever again.evilpaul666 - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
So... they're veteran patent trolls?Strunf - Monday, March 9, 2020 - link
It wasn't just SDR, it was DDR too and the last case they lost was in 2011.After that they settled with everyone for "pocket money".
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
Too bad that there's some misinformed zealots here who have bitter feelings based on erroneousfacts:
<<But that is not how this litigation, broadly conceived, begun. Micron sued Rambus for declaratory judgment on August 28, 2000 in Delaware. Hynix sued Rambus for declaratory judgment the next day here in San Jose, California. Persuasive circumstantial evidence suggests that Micron and Hynix coordinated their filing of the declaratory judgment lawsuits. See Conduct Trial Tr. 4006:8-4008:12 (Mar. 5, 2008) (former Hynix employee Farhad Tabrizi admitting to his belief in 2000 prior to litigation with Rambus that Hynix would litigate "to the end of Rambus company"); 5131:1-25; 5135:1-16 (Mar. 18, 2008) (testimony of Micron CEO Steve Appleton that he met with Hynix personnel in early August of 2000 and that he cancelled licensing meetings with Rambus to sue for declaratory judgment); 5633:16-5634:1 (Mar. 20, 2008) (testimony from Hynix employee D.S. Chung about licensing meetings Hynix scheduled with Rambus, then cancelled by suing for declaratory judgment); cf. Licensing Trial Tr. 420:24-423:6 (Sept. 24, 2008) (testimony of Samsung employee Jay Shim regarding joint defense agreement between Samsung, Hynix, Micron, and Infineon enteredinto in August 2000).>>
scribd.com
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
Better link:https://www.scribd.com/document/11619032/3897
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
Rambus Receives Decision in SK Hynix CaseRambus entitled to compensation for infringement based on fair and reasonable royalty rates
https://www.rambus.com/rambus-receives-decision-in...
SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES – 09/23/2012 – Rambus Inc. (Nasdaq:RMBS), one of the world’s premier technology licensing companies, today announced that the judge for the Northern District of California (NDCA) has issued his decision in the matter with SK Hynix. The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte has found that the Rambus patents in this case are valid and infringed by SK Hynix and Rambus is entitled to receive royalty payments for past infringement based on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) rates.
“This is a positive result as it is consistent with what we’ve been seeking all along – reasonable compensation for the use of our patented inventions,” said Thomas Lavelle, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus. “We appreciate the Court’s extensive efforts in working through years of complex arguments. While this decision does not provide SK Hynix with a going-forward license, we are hopeful it will lead to putting this matter behind us completely and allow us to reach reasonable agreements.”
In his ruling, Judge Whyte found that Rambus executed its document retention practices during a time when it reasonably anticipated litigation, and thus willfully spoliated evidence, but also found that Rambus did not deliberately destroy documents it knew to be damaging. The parties have been ordered to provide briefs on the issue of the damages SK Hynix will need to pay Rambus.
Rambus management will discuss this decision during a special conference call on Monday, September 24, 2012 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: (855) 859-2056 (domestic) or (404) 537-3406 (international) with the ID# 34575979.
Background of the Matter
This case was originally filed by SK Hynix against Rambus in August 2000. The case was split into three separate phases with Rambus prevailing in all three phases. The first phase considered SK Hynix’s allegations that certain Rambus patents should be unenforceable under the doctrine of unclean hands and spoliation
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
drenxnx, very good point. But what's scary about some people is that their methodologyof thought can be dangerous. I'm not saying just because of this but for any other
important reason:
It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So - Mark Twain.
Sahrin - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
AMD put 16GB of HBM on the $700 Radeon VII.They're crazy if they don't think there's a market for this tech on a CPU.
MrEcho - Friday, March 6, 2020 - link
Im just waiting for this to happen. And now with the memory controller on its on chip...close - Monday, March 9, 2020 - link
Would be nice for highly integrated systems (laptops, AIOs, and such, assuming the power consumption is kept in check), or if you could still expand the memory using regular DDR DIMMs. But this implies having more complexity on the IMC side. Also trying to fit another 4 dies (for 64GB of RAM) today on something like a 3700X would make for a crowded package.MDD1963 - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
TIme for RAMBUS to file a lawsuit over other vendors perhaps using bits and bytes and stuff....and transferring them...to and from!Lord of the Bored - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
Rambus is still around? Why aren't they dead yet?FreckledTrout - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
Because they keep coming up with new ideas and selling IP. They are a hybrid patent troll and actual make new IP.electronicschlong - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
Once again Rambus isnt making a product or service, they're making a patent to sue innovators. Rambus is a parasite on the industry and the world will be better when they disappear.Yojimbo - Saturday, March 7, 2020 - link
They are making a design which they patent and license to anyone who wants to use it. If they didn't license the design from RAMBUS they'd have to license it from someone else or design it themselves. Designing it themselves would mean hiring people with the expertise to do it. Apparently, RAMBUS is a lower cost, or higher quality, designer. It's a standard service that is a key part of the tech industry. It is performed by many companies and relied on by many companies that make products.webdoctors - Sunday, March 8, 2020 - link
That's not entirely accurate. When you license a commercial IP block design from someone, its verified and tested. Its something tangible that is production quality. Its not just a block diagram and a patent. Otherwise what's to stop someone from printing out all the papers from ASPLOS/MICRO/ISCA and filing them all at the patent office and hoping it passes under the radar of the authors and selling it to 3rd parties as a "design" folks can license.When you get a block from Syopsys or Cadence or other 3rd party IP design companies its usually pretty mature and maybe even taped out on a test chip to ensure it works.
tldr Avoid Rambus unless you want to spend more on lawyers than engineers
UltraWide - Monday, March 9, 2020 - link
Thank you for this! It's nice to have some facts once in a while!Yojimbo - Friday, March 13, 2020 - link
What facts? The fact that Rambus hasn't sued anybody in something like 20 years? Why do you his assertions that make no sense to be "facts"? You believe that Rambus are forcing people to buy their PHYs?Yojimbo - Friday, March 13, 2020 - link
Please source me where you get the idea that Rambus's IP blocks are not verified and tested whereas others are. And even if so, it's not relevant, because if Rambus's blocks are not verified or tested then that is perfectly OK with their customers who choose them. I believe what I said was entirely accurate and what you said is just nonsense.balle - Thursday, March 26, 2020 - link
You might want to step into DesignCon and see a working demo of this technology that is tested, verified and is being used by multiple customersDeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
So you're saying that Rambus doesn't collaborate, verify and test?<<Samsung and eSilicon Taped Out 14nm Network Processor with Rambus 28G SerDes Solution>>
https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-and-esilic...
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
You're saying that Rambus doesn't do tape outs?<<Rambus Announces Tapeout of GDDR6 Memory PHY on TSMC 7nm Process Technology
Leading IP to support TSMC’s customers with AI, HPC, automotive and networking applications
SUNNYVALE and SANTA CLARA, Calif. – Jan. 30, 2019 >>
https://www.rambus.com/rambus-announces-tapeout-of...
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
No tape outs? Why do you comment without understanding what you're commenting about?Rambus Tapes Out 112G XSR SerDes PHY on Leading-edge 7nm Process
Highlights:
Provides critical building block to deliver data for next-generation data center, networking, high-performance computing (HPC), artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) applications
Delivers superior power, performance and area (PPA) for extra short reach (XSR) links with innovative architecture designed for leading-edge 7nm process node
Expands SerDes PHY portfolio for 112G OIF-CEI industry standard
SUNNYVALE, Calif. – Sep. 25, 2019
https://www.rambus.com/rambus-tapes-out-112g-xsr-s...
DeeDee - Sunday, May 31, 2020 - link
Yojimbo, thank you for your informed and intelligent comment.I would think that individuals reading about technology would have high enough
IQs to make informed and well thought out comments. But too bad that isn't the
case in some instances. Some bring up old and misinformed biases that they
just can't grow out of!
ravyne - Sunday, March 8, 2020 - link
Appears to be a typo in the second paragraph, it says memory devices of up to 16Gbps, but I think you mean to say 16Gb.master098 - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link
Made us delighted with your article ,best regards from https://typhoon-tv.com/legendsneverdie1455 - Monday, July 6, 2020 - link
Thanks for the detailed article, Would love to see more of these. https://tricksground.com/typhoon-tv-apk-download/