Rambus appeal hinges on disclosure rules

The Rambus business plan was designed to lead rivals to the licensing "collection plate," Starr said during 75 minutes of oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit here.

The appeal is the latest step in the high-stakes patent dispute between Infineon and Rambus focused on the latter's participat ion in the deliberations of the Joint Electron Devices Engineering Council (Jedec). Rambus (Los Altos, Calif.) participated in Jedec's SDRAM standards deliberations for about four-and-a-half years before leaving in 1996. It later pursued SDRAM patent infringement lawsuits against Infineon and other chip makers.

The appeals court must decide whether to reverse a fraud verdict against Rambus handed down last year by a federal jury in Richmond, Va. Rambus attorney Richard Taranto said Infineon's fraud case was flawed because it misrepresented Jedec's disclosure requirements. Rambus "had nothing to disclose" about its SDRAM claims because "there was no communicated disclosure policy" at Jedec.

Jedec had a "pro-disclosure policy," Starr countered.

Questioning by the appeals court indicated that at least one of the judges viewed Rambus' patent maneuvers as within the scope of its original patent claims for SDRAM technology. Judge Randall Rader also asked Starr whether Jedec's open meeting r ules made it possible to track the group's deliberations after it left in 1996. Rambus said it decided to leave the group after concluding that the cost in intellectual property would be too high for it to comply with an industry spec.

One of the more startling revelations during last year's trial was that Rambus had a spy at Jedec meetings in 1997.

The questions bears on Infineon's claim that Rambus had an obligation to disclose its patent claims during Jedec negotiations on a SDRAM standard. Taranto also stressed that the meetings had to be conducted in the open with ready access to its proceedings to avoid antitrust scrutiny.

Starr said Rambus chose to participate in the standards talks, and later used the information to "morph" its patent applications to cover the Jedec standard.

Rambus "embarked on a multi-year process" to tailor its patent applications to the Jedec spec and "pulled the trigger in 2000" when it began filing patent infringement lawsuits. "They have come af ter the entire industry," Starr said.

The appeals court is expected to rule on the patent case by the end of the year.