Did Rambus give away the farm?
A substantial number of Ramboids have expressed disappointment with the litigation settlement / licensing agreement that Rambus inked with Infineon. An even larger number have likely kept their similar beliefs to themselves, not wanting to fuel the bashers or face reality.
What is known is that Rambus and Infineon issued a joint and rather vague press release. It is unclear exactly what the parties agreed to other than they have terminated their litigation and Infineon is going to send Ramubs $46.8M before the end of 2007. Unfortunately, until Rambus (or Infineon) release additional information, shareholders are left to speculate.
I believe that the press release was written by legal counsel or at a minimum, reviewed and approved by legal counsel. If this is true, what is and maybe more importantly, what is not, included in the press release may suggest details that in a first or second quick reading might be missed.
While the kids eat their Easter Sunday candy, let’s dissect the press release yet again. Starting with what appears unambiguous and then onto the foggy terrain and the land of speculation . . .
“In addition to the licenses, the two companies have agreed to the immediate dismissal of all pending litigation and have released each other from all existing legal claims.”
That is clear enough. Rambus and Infineon are leaving the courtrooms where they have been engaged (pending litigation) and have given each other blanket forgiveness for trespasses that are or were included in the litigation and any other existing trespasses not included in the litigation (all existing legal claims).
Evidence that the hatchets have been buried is shown in the court filing in Virginia and the docket in California:
A Stipulation Of Dismissal With Prejudice was filed in Rambus v Infineon in Richmond, Virginia.
Dismissal With Prejudice Of Complaint As To Defendant Infineon Technologies North America Corporation Siemens Corporation Siemens Ag Infineon Technologies Ag was filed in San Francisco, California.
“Infineon has simultaneously granted to Rambus a fully-paid perpetual license for memory interfaces.”
Wisps of fog are drifting across the landscape . . . “interfaces”, is that two or all of Infineon’s interfaces? “Fully-paid perpetual license” – a license lasting forever that does not require Rambus to pay Infineon additional compensation. What is the value of the license? Does this open a new market for Rambus in the automotive world? Is this simply a safety-net provision in the agreement to eliminate any potential infringement by Rambus of Infineon’s intellectual property (IP)?
“The agreement also provides Infineon an option for acquiring certain other licenses. All licenses provide for Infineon to be treated as a "most-favored customer" of Rambus.”
“ . . . provides Infineon an option for acquiring certain other licenses.” Well, “other” is clear – Infineon did not receive in the agreement a license for all Rambus’ IP and “certain” limits the field. “Option” and “most-favored customer” gives Infineon the right to obtain a license at a cost equal to the lowest price Rambus charges any other buyer.
“Rambus has granted to Infineon a worldwide license to existing and future Rambus patents and patent applications for use in Infineon memory products. In exchange, Infineon will pay a quarterly license fee of US $5.85 million starting by November 15, 2005 through November 15, 2007. After November 15, 2007, and only if Rambus enters into additional specified licensing agreements with certain other DRAM manufacturers, Infineon will make additional quarterly payments which may accumulate up to a maximum of an additional $100 million.”
Fog bank ahead . . . “Rambus has granted to Infineon a worldwide license to existing and future Rambus patents and patent applications.” At first blush, it reads like Rambus sold the farm. However, when considering that the agreement as discussed above also “provides Infineon with an option for acquiring certain other licenses” – it is apparent that all “existing and future patents and patent applications” have not been licensed as of yet.
What is the IP that Rambus licensed? Likely, only IP that was the subject of the litigation and very closely related and identified IP. XDR? In my opinion, not a chance. That is covered in the option as a most-favored customer.
What needs to happen for Rambus to receive the additional $100M? Simply, get Infineon’s competitors to pay Rambus for the same IP so that Infineon is not at a competitive disadvantage.
Is $146.8M all that Rambus is going to receive from Infineon for SDRAM, DDR I and DDR II and all the millions and millions of dollars in legal costs that Rambus incurred? Speculation - perhaps, not. Why? I didn’t read “fully-paid perpetual license” in that paragraph. Maybe, the “maximum of an additional $100 million” is for a license of limited term.
Who knows? Rambus and Infineon . . . and Rambus continues to treat its loyal and long-suffering shareholders with disrespect by failing to provide information so that informed investment decisions can be made.
A substantial number of Ramboids have expressed disappointment with the litigation settlement / licensing agreement that Rambus inked with Infineon. An even larger number have likely kept their similar beliefs to themselves, not wanting to fuel the bashers or face reality.
What is known is that Rambus and Infineon issued a joint and rather vague press release. It is unclear exactly what the parties agreed to other than they have terminated their litigation and Infineon is going to send Ramubs $46.8M before the end of 2007. Unfortunately, until Rambus (or Infineon) release additional information, shareholders are left to speculate.
I believe that the press release was written by legal counsel or at a minimum, reviewed and approved by legal counsel. If this is true, what is and maybe more importantly, what is not, included in the press release may suggest details that in a first or second quick reading might be missed.
While the kids eat their Easter Sunday candy, let’s dissect the press release yet again. Starting with what appears unambiguous and then onto the foggy terrain and the land of speculation . . .
“In addition to the licenses, the two companies have agreed to the immediate dismissal of all pending litigation and have released each other from all existing legal claims.”
That is clear enough. Rambus and Infineon are leaving the courtrooms where they have been engaged (pending litigation) and have given each other blanket forgiveness for trespasses that are or were included in the litigation and any other existing trespasses not included in the litigation (all existing legal claims).
Evidence that the hatchets have been buried is shown in the court filing in Virginia and the docket in California:
A Stipulation Of Dismissal With Prejudice was filed in Rambus v Infineon in Richmond, Virginia.
Dismissal With Prejudice Of Complaint As To Defendant Infineon Technologies North America Corporation Siemens Corporation Siemens Ag Infineon Technologies Ag was filed in San Francisco, California.
“Infineon has simultaneously granted to Rambus a fully-paid perpetual license for memory interfaces.”
Wisps of fog are drifting across the landscape . . . “interfaces”, is that two or all of Infineon’s interfaces? “Fully-paid perpetual license” – a license lasting forever that does not require Rambus to pay Infineon additional compensation. What is the value of the license? Does this open a new market for Rambus in the automotive world? Is this simply a safety-net provision in the agreement to eliminate any potential infringement by Rambus of Infineon’s intellectual property (IP)?
“The agreement also provides Infineon an option for acquiring certain other licenses. All licenses provide for Infineon to be treated as a "most-favored customer" of Rambus.”
“ . . . provides Infineon an option for acquiring certain other licenses.” Well, “other” is clear – Infineon did not receive in the agreement a license for all Rambus’ IP and “certain” limits the field. “Option” and “most-favored customer” gives Infineon the right to obtain a license at a cost equal to the lowest price Rambus charges any other buyer.
“Rambus has granted to Infineon a worldwide license to existing and future Rambus patents and patent applications for use in Infineon memory products. In exchange, Infineon will pay a quarterly license fee of US $5.85 million starting by November 15, 2005 through November 15, 2007. After November 15, 2007, and only if Rambus enters into additional specified licensing agreements with certain other DRAM manufacturers, Infineon will make additional quarterly payments which may accumulate up to a maximum of an additional $100 million.”
Fog bank ahead . . . “Rambus has granted to Infineon a worldwide license to existing and future Rambus patents and patent applications.” At first blush, it reads like Rambus sold the farm. However, when considering that the agreement as discussed above also “provides Infineon with an option for acquiring certain other licenses” – it is apparent that all “existing and future patents and patent applications” have not been licensed as of yet.
What is the IP that Rambus licensed? Likely, only IP that was the subject of the litigation and very closely related and identified IP. XDR? In my opinion, not a chance. That is covered in the option as a most-favored customer.
What needs to happen for Rambus to receive the additional $100M? Simply, get Infineon’s competitors to pay Rambus for the same IP so that Infineon is not at a competitive disadvantage.
Is $146.8M all that Rambus is going to receive from Infineon for SDRAM, DDR I and DDR II and all the millions and millions of dollars in legal costs that Rambus incurred? Speculation - perhaps, not. Why? I didn’t read “fully-paid perpetual license” in that paragraph. Maybe, the “maximum of an additional $100 million” is for a license of limited term.
Who knows? Rambus and Infineon . . . and Rambus continues to treat its loyal and long-suffering shareholders with disrespect by failing to provide information so that informed investment decisions can be made.
Thanks for asking,
Any Donkey
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment