http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/ Engadget Comments for Court case shocker: Judge rules in favor of Rambus, not NVIDIA... sort of http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 23rd 2010 5:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
++ for puns]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
These a**holes are a cancer to tech and never contributed anything to it except some overpriced ram that quickly faded away mid 90s!

They make their livin for decades just sueing and settling.
I suspect nowadays rambus is basically a law firm.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 9:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/did you guys ever think of making a dedicate site for it, like Engadget Law, or something
]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/In the Country of Europe a Patent system do not exist and illegal.
America should copy that idea.

What are patents good for? as a consumer? nothing ]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Yeah we don't have these patent laws. It just seems silly for a company to lock down ideas like this - in regards to the consumer, at least. It just slows development of the product if one company just sits on it for a gazillion years just because they have the rights to.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
"Country of Europe"? Are you Miss South Carolina?]]>Jan 23rd 2010 6:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Without patents the technology would advance at a much slower pace.
Why would anybody spends billions of dollars/year for achieving something that the john doe next door is going to copy for free, how does he pays for the development costs?
Microsoft: Over US$ 5Bi/year in R&D
Apple: Over US$ 1Bi/year
Intel: US$ 5Bi/year
and so on...

I don't think Intel would spend 5bi if AMD could just copy whatever the output is...

And EU does have patents just like here...
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/
]]>Jan 23rd 2010 6:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
Your correct in that patents are a must, but there current implementation is flawed. I believe a 1 year hold on a patent is all that should be allowed without a renewal , That is enough time for a company to make a head start and capitalize on its ideas.
But currently patents are also used to hold back technology, the auto, oil, battery, ect... industries use it to keep us locked into technology that is stagnant. The electric car would have been here years ago without patents getting in the way. We would have batteries that last longer and with less being thrown into the trash. ]]>Jan 23rd 2010 7:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 23rd 2010 8:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
I'd rather technology slow to a complete halt than see even a single freedom destroyed.

What companies should do is make it extremely difficult for anything to be reverse-engineered. Obfuscate every single aspect of the design, and don't document it to anybody. Radically change the entire architecture with every single SKU so that reverse-engineering one model won't give you a head start on reverse-engineering the next. Invest in processes so microscopic that analyzing it will require the most expensive machines in the world. Put booby traps in the product so if anyone tries to take it apart or even disable the trap, it literally blows up in their face.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 10:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/And it would still require a 1mi bonus to hire a chief engineer and get everything...
IP is not only obtained trough reverse engineering, but information is leaked trough employees changing jobs, hacks, or some smart ass that do it for fun.
If you like company A IP, just buy their product for their feature... I see it as a perfectly healthy competition, makes company B to have to develop something even better to keep their customers.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 11:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Oh, and drastically change the entire architecture from product A to B?
You ALWAYS want to leverage your platforms unless it really needs a revamp.
time to get out of the LAN house and get back to the real world.

Go develop a hardware/software from scratch and see how much time/money it would take]]>Jan 24th 2010 12:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
Was that sarcasm? Yeah, let's put DRM on EVERYTHING!

/s]]>Jan 24th 2010 2:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_International_Trade_Commission

That is, this _wasn't_ a court case.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
Will Dr. Dre ever get tired of the product placing my headphones in everything he stars in? ]]>Jan 23rd 2010 5:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 23rd 2010 7:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/

]]>Jan 23rd 2010 6:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
But then again, we have a supreme court that believes that paper entities (organizations that are just virtual objects created by a set of contracts) are due the same free speech rights as humans. So maybe I'm expecting too much. ]]>Jan 23rd 2010 6:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 23rd 2010 7:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 23rd 2010 8:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
It would save them money in the long run, as they'd never have to deal with a Rambus suit again.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 9:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/
And for extra spite, they should take every single object in Rambus' headquarters (including the building itself), reduce them to their raw materials, and sell them on the open market (e.g. sell all the metal to scrapyards).

I'm sure that all the plaques in Rambus' office will be worth something to someone once they're all melted down and converted into raw materials.]]>Jan 23rd 2010 9:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/23/court-case-shocker-judge-rules-in-favor-of-rambus-not-nvidia/Jan 24th 2010 1:18AM