"Speak softly and carry a big stick."
-Theodore Roosevelt-
I don't find it logical to believe that the amigos would take this article as a sign of defeat and frustration on the part of Rambus. Spin it around for a second, if you will: How many articles have we seen from Micron, for example, stating that the DOJ investigation has absolutely nothing to do with Rambus's AT case? How about the Hynix verdict having no implications on Micron's cases with Rambus? We, and even more so Rambus, know that what we read in the press and what is actually discussed behind closed doors are miles apart in terms of similarity.
Early on, Rambus was burdened with the characteristic of strong-armed negotiation practices and unwillingness to budge in it's evil quest to extract the maximum amount of royalties it possibly could from the already-thin profit margins of John Q. Public's few remaining US semiconductor manufacturing facilities, thus threatening Mr. Public's job and the low computer prices he enjoyed, all by means of a scheme through which Rambus fraudulently obtained it's patents and tricked the semiconductor companies to unknowingly, and thus unwillingly, incorporate Rambus's illegitimate inventions in their products
(sound about right?)
How did that come about? Well, while Rambus proclaimed in the press that it would fight tooth and nail to obtain the royalties owed to it, the MMs were arguing that the deceptive Rambus had set a trap. Rambus had tricked the MMs and was threatening to steal their profits. Rambus was thus labeled as the bully in the public eye, and we all know that, given the choice, the majority of the population tends to side with the victim, not the bully.
It is painfully obvious that when the amigos came across as the victims, Rambus took a beating in every aspect of the company; from profits, to litigation, to the press. Now that they have a phenomenal win under their belt, would it seem logical to repeat history and come out swinging again? Why not instead use the strategy of the amigos in the court of public opinion? Rambus has portrayed itself in this article as a great little American company with revolutionary products that do nothing but benefit everyone who uses them, from the circuit designers all the way down the line to the end user. They back up these claims with the references to Sony's Playstation consoles (how many people don't know what a Playstation is?) They also state that they are currently fighting an attack on multiple fronts by multiple opponents, all of whom are coordinating their legal efforts to squash this innovative company. Furthermore, the interviewer even references the "Deadly Menace" memo we have all come to know and love. Glad to see that us investors are not the only ones to have seen this. Hugues' comments on DDR3 also add to the "hey, we're the victim here" impression. He says he's seen this scenario before, he'll see it again. They'll claim they discovered" the technologies that Rambus designed years ago and we'll start again at square one. We just want it to stop. Lastly, the lack of intention to go after systems companies like Dell speaks volumes to me on Rambus's fairness in this whole mess. Dell is not the company infringing in this matter, so we do not have the intention of pursuing litigation against them. Hey! Go figure! Rambus DOESN'T want to sue somebody.
So, to close this long-winded rant, my opinion is that Rambus is NOT dealing with the amigos weakly, as this article may insinuate. The amigos know that this is nothing more than a press piece because their dealings with Rambus are behind closed doors and out of the public eye, and this is posturing on the part of Rambus for the AT case which looms on the horizon.
If anything, as an amigo who used this strategy successfully over the last decade WITHOUT the truth on my side, I'd be somewhat concerned about my opponent using it against me while the truth IS on their side.
-Johnny-
AI
