DRAM probe picks up steam

TalkBack 4 of 4:

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Micron comment re FTC Decision

How irrelevant was the reply by Micron spokesman, David
Parker, to the embarrassing exposure of a 2001 e-mail
regarding probably price fixing action. He said "Rambus
has attemped to confuse these issues to take attention
from the FTC's charges against Rambus. It appears to be
an attempt by Ramgus to distract the publivc and others
from their actions. We are very concerned about
information like this being taken out of context and being
represented as fact."

Let's see all the things wrong with that statement that the
reporter apparently didn't catch or wasn't interested in. (1)
Rambus discovered this e-mail and other documents under
subpoena to Micron during discovery before the FTC trial of
Rambus. Rambus was defending itself before the judge
and this document was part of its defense so it wasn't
trying to take attention from the charges;

(2) It wasn't an attempt to distract the public for the
publication of this e-mail was in the judge's 348 page
Initial Decision released early this week -- unless the judge
is trying to distract the public;

(3) The e-mail was quoted in No. 558 (page 80) of 1,665
"Findings of Fact" by the judge based on presentations by
both sides. Thus it was certified as fact by Judge McGuire.
As for

(4) The e-mail was included by the trial judge in the
context of over 200 page portion of his ID entitled
"Findings of Fact." Specifically, it was in part V " Ramlink
and Synclink, the Synclink Consortium Intel and Dram
manufacturers" section C. "Rambus's Relationships with
Intel and DRAM Manufacturers" ; subsection 5 "Actions by
DRAM Manufacturers (pp. 75-80) which included 34
paragraphs of "facts."

What other context did David Parker have in mind? Perhaps
in the context of fact #546 in which Micron and Hyundai
committed to Intel produce to produce certain amounts of
RDRAM units which it didn't produce as part of effort
organized by others to sandbag Intel to kill RDRAM by
misleading Intel into thinking there would be an adequate
supply of RDRAMs when in fact they had no intention of
making nearly the amount promised.

Or perhaps Mr. Parker had in mind the context of it's
regional sales manager's plea bargain for obsructing justice
over price fixing that is very definitely tied in with Rambus
defense although the linkage is too complicated to discuss
here? One would have to be very gullible to believe that
Micron's sales manager engaged in that price fixing on his
own.

Or is it in the context of the stories earlier this year that
Micron is negotiating with DOJ for settlement of its role in
DOJ's long running price fixing investigation?

Mr. Spooner of CNET news hasn't even begun to get into
the story of the the dram probe, prosecution of Rambus,
etc. I suggest he read the entire judge's ID to get an idea
of the depth of conspiracy and double dealing that has
been going on for over 10 years. He'll even find the
"Deadly Menace" label given Rambus by Infineon's Meyer.
It's a long read, but material enough in it for several good
stories.

Posted by: Saigoncowboy   Posted on: 02/26/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now