News

posted on 13 June 2008 10:16

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is appealing a decision by a court in April to clear Rambus of anti-trust activity in the DRAM market.

Rambus, a licensor of memory chip interface and other technology intellectual property, was cleared of anti-trust activities concerning the DRAM market in April this year by a U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Washington. That ruling said the FTC had failed to show how Rambus harmed competition in the $31.5 billion market for DRAM chips.

The substance of the FTC case was that Rambus was promoting certain technologies as a standard for DRAM chips but failed to tell other members of the standard-setting body that it owned patents on those technologies, and so would earn royalties on their use. This was, the FTC said, 'deceptive conduct.' Rambus said it followed the rules and denied wrong-doing.

The FTC wants a new hearing of its case by the entire D.C. Circuit. It is supported by the American Antitrust Institute (AAI)  which filed a motion on June 11th in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to support the Federal Trade Commission.

The AAI is composed on many legal firms, lawyers and others and believes that anti-trust legislation is bering enforced sub-optimally in the USA. It is an independent non-profit education, research and advocacy organization formed in 1998. Its mission, it says, is to increase the role of competition, assure that competition works in the interests of consumers, and challenge abuses of concentrated economic power in the American and world economy.

Its president, Albert Foer, said: “Rambus’ conduct was patent ambush, securing a monopoly through deception. Rambus’ conduct will result in consumers paying more for the memory products that are essential to operation of every computer.”

In the motion and accompanying brief that were authored by volunteer attorney David Balto on behalf of the AAI, the Consumer Federation of America, and the Public Patent Foundation, the parties argue that the panel’s decision is inconsistent with the D.C. Circuit’s seminal decision in U.S. v. Microsoft.

The AAI believes the panel’s decision fails to recognize the core Section 2 principle of that decision that the acquisition of monopoly power by illegitimate means unrelated to superior skill, industry, or foresight is – and ought to continue to be—a violation of the federal antitrust laws. In this case the court created a new rule that would make it nearly impossible to challenge deceptive conduct by a monopolist.

Foer said: "There can be no doubt that the deception engaged in by Rambus should not receive any special solicitude under the antitrust laws. If this decision stands, it will encourage deception and other conduct detrimental to the standard-setting process which will ultimately harm consumers and high tech companies that depend on a fair standard-setting process.”

Rambus' legal bills are set to continue as it fights tenaciously for its best interests and continues to deny any wrongdoing.

^{[Paul Roberts, news editor.]}