Replies to post #7979 on Rambus (RMBS)

[smd1234]

Don't know WHY Hynix looks inept consistently, but they do. I mentioned maybe too many cooks w/o a QB.
Nice mixed metaphor, eh?

I expect no better in the March trial.

smd

[bearinvt]

Assume for the moment that Rambus wins the entire matter in JW's court. And lets just say that in the course of things the jury and judge (or however it works) decide on both parties behalf that the inventions are worth a royalty rate of "x." And let's also say that Rambus is satisfied with the outcome, so they settle with Hynix.

The question is, can they settle on the issues of infringement but continue to litigate against Hynix on AT? I would assume that Rambus can. If this is true then you can see where a significant award lies for the bus.

[Newcombe]

<<take a look at the Mobil/Amoco case of 1994. In that instance Mobil wasn't even trying for the whole amount - they tried to claim 1/2 the savings to Amoco as a "reasonable" royalty.>>

Post a link, please -- Is this royalty due the owner of a depleting asset, that is, oil in place in the ground? If so, I wouldn't think it would have much bearing on how royalty is calculated in cases of ownership of intellectual property or an invention.