In 1996 Billy Garrett, Ramscam's first JEDEC representative and one of their attendees involved in gleaning information from the SDRAM and DDR standardization process to aid in construction of their "patent minefield", went into great detail as to what was envisioned in a bogus "Rambus standards committee"
They would falsely pretend "openness" while ignoring input from anyone, even the abundance of engineers with both better skills and better ideas. They would demand "patent pooling" of any and all improvements on their Rambus, using the 1990 scrapheap as a "blocking patent" to prevent anyone trapped in the pool from escaping without a lawsuit. All would be centered around the Rambus of the moment (it was ever-changing in order to escape the myriad deficiencies Ramscam originally designed in and elaborated on in order to "fix" their "invention) and incentives to be independently innovative would be discouraged by Ramscam's ability to ignore input, use its "patent" as a bludgeon and force "sharing" of IP among their "partners".
"Q. If I could direct your attention to the second page, the third paragraph from the bottom. The first sentence there, you write, "The most valuable patents are ones that must be used in order to be in compliance with the standard." Do you see that? A. Yes, sir, I do. Q. And the reason they're valuable is that such patents cannot be avoided. Is that right? A. Well, in the situation to where you want to build a device that's compliant with the standard, whatever the standard is. Q.Okay, well, that's what you wrote in the very next sentence, isn't it? Let me read that sentence for you. "Unlike implementation patents which may or may not be required for the job -- to get the job done, ones that must be used cannot be avoided.""
This is the essence of Ramscam's patent philosophy. They don't care about actually being able to make something useful, they just want patents to entrap people by insisting that the claims they write are "essential" to the practice of some "standard", if not their crappy Rambus standards then the standards of JEDEC or PCI-SIG or the IEEE would do just fine for their purposes. They want to sue, get in the way of progress and "tax the makers".