- Jan 23, 2002
- 2,206
- 12
- 81
I just read the ITC document. This is the important piece:
The Commission invited briefing on the issues under review and on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Having reviewed the parties’ submissions, and responses thereto, the Commission has determined to request further briefing on the impact of the license between Rambus and Samsung on the ALJ’s findings and conclusions. The Commission is particularly interested in briefing on the issue of patent
exhaustion that Respondents raised in their petition for review and remedy submissions as it
relates to the license.
In layman's speak, Nvidia raised issue with the fact that Samsung has already settled with Rambus. Since Nvidia's controllers are also used as a part in Samsung's memory, they are arguing that patent exhaustion applies since you can't charge royalty twice for something sold as one unit.
What confuses me is that Nvidia makes graphic chips as standalone units, and they are all clearly infringing. I'm not sure why the ITC couldn't just ban them now and talk about the logistics of the Samsung agreement later.
The delay is until July 25th. All eyes on CAFC now.
BTW, I think RMBS has now won with the ITC full commission. It makes no sense to go over this the next two months if RMBS has lost.
The Commission invited briefing on the issues under review and on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Having reviewed the parties’ submissions, and responses thereto, the Commission has determined to request further briefing on the impact of the license between Rambus and Samsung on the ALJ’s findings and conclusions. The Commission is particularly interested in briefing on the issue of patent
exhaustion that Respondents raised in their petition for review and remedy submissions as it
relates to the license.
In layman's speak, Nvidia raised issue with the fact that Samsung has already settled with Rambus. Since Nvidia's controllers are also used as a part in Samsung's memory, they are arguing that patent exhaustion applies since you can't charge royalty twice for something sold as one unit.
What confuses me is that Nvidia makes graphic chips as standalone units, and they are all clearly infringing. I'm not sure why the ITC couldn't just ban them now and talk about the logistics of the Samsung agreement later.
The delay is until July 25th. All eyes on CAFC now.
BTW, I think RMBS has now won with the ITC full commission. It makes no sense to go over this the next two months if RMBS has lost.
Last edited: