You can read the entire FTC Complaint Councsel's response to the Rambus motion for a stay + "clarification" of the FTC's remedy order on the FTC website ... but here's a very concise summary of what the CC says in his response:
* DDR2, DDR3, etc. are vastly larger markets than DDR, and ONLY DDR is covered by the FTC's remedy order ... DDR3, DDR3, etc. free & wide open for Rambus to go after royalty licenses from infringers of DDR2/DDR3/etc. (and/or to sue them)
* the CC says that the DDR2/DDR3 markets are approx. $26 BILLION per year (so you can easily calculate that a mere 1% royalty on THAT would bring in over $2 billion per year in Rambus royalty revenue ... a mere 0.5% roylaty would bring in over a BILLION per year to Rambus!)
* the CC says Rambus can now appeal the FTC's order to a real appeals court (where ALL legal analysis and precedent makes abundantly clear Rambus WILL win the appeal against the FTC)
* Most likely an escrow account will be made going forward, for infringers to deposit their royalty money owed, and that money would be released to Rambus after they win in the appeals court
* Lastly, the CC says that NO refund by Rambus needs to be made for PAST royalties to current licencees
Bottom line ... the CC is attempting to "punt" and get the FTC out from under their LONGEST, most costly (and most bogus) prosecution in the FTC's history.
Not nearly as hard as the 'amigoes' attorneys. Also, I was only pointing out a multiplication error. I hope we soon get something approaching those numbers. It is a travesty of justice that this has been allowed to continue for long. It will be interesting to see the actions of the DOJ plus the 40 attorneys generals in all this, as the FTC is up a tree and it is burning up the trunk rather rapidly. One wonders about the character of the attorneys for the amigoes, as they simply defy any level of professional ethics to which they are bound. After the cases are decided, Rambus should seek criminal action against them, seek to have them disbarred and file massive civil damages against them. Some of it might not stick, but having those idiots have to wreck ten years of their lives, spending millions of dollars and running the risk of financial ruin is the least RMBS could do for them. Afterall, why not return the favor. I hope they don't license those creeps.
"If you overtake the last person, then you are...?"
Sounds like a question a Bandito lawyer would ask to twist the truth. You can't "overtake" the last person in a race. Oval track or not.
If you overtake the last person, then you are...?
Answer: If you answered that you are second to last, then you are wrong again. Tell me, how can you overtake the LAST Person?
Well, if I am in a race on an oval track and I overtake the last person...I am in the same position as I was before I overtook the last person. Ex: If I am in second place and the race leader already overtook the LAST person, then I will still be in the second position when I pass the last person.
Thanks DaveSue for the post.
I've been reading the ftc/cc responses for over an hour, and those are the facts that seemed the most clear to me, but I am not in the legal field.
Should you be able to glean more clarities off the other board, please feel free to post them here.
We would appreciate that.