Rambus (RMBS)

[calbiker]

LOL, thought this would get back to the bus.

Thanks for posting the link again. Perhaps some people didn't see it the first time?

This is quite amusing.

http://investor.rambus.com/downloads/2005-10-18%20Hynix%20Motion%20for%20Reconsideration%20of%20Clai...

Didn't read the entire brief, but here's a few notes:

device: unduly expansive

Federal Appeals Court applied the classic definition:
Integrated circuit device: circuit constructed on a monolithic substrate, commonly called a chip.

Federal Appeals Court applied the classic definition:
bus: set of signal lines to which a number of devices are connected and over which information is transferred between devices.

Payne:
The invention resided in the use of a bus architecture in which the bus carried all address, data, and control information on a single set of lines with substantially fewer lines bits than the number of bits in a single address

Devices covered by the claims of the patent are limited to devices with an interface to a narrow, multiplexed bus.

Throughout the specification of each of the patents, the ‘device’ is described as having an interface to a narrow, multiplexed bus.

********************************************************

The problem I see is that Hynix wants to reduce the expanse of 'device' such that even RDRAM doesn't fit the patent. Ha. The Rambus patents (in one embodiment) talk about a narrow multiplexed bus that carries data, address and control signals. RDRAM (as well as SDRAM or DDR) do not have that type of bus. Both RDRAM and DDR have a data bus and another multiplexed address/control bus. Two distinct busses. The patent describes just one bus that does all communications.