nicht mal Hager glaubt noch an eine Settlement,Payne gibt IFX einfach zu gute Chancen...
Patent Fights a Necessary Evil in Technology Innovation
Although the Rambus litigation has been exceptionally rancorous and filled with legal twists and turns, there is a nothing unusual about a technology company dependent on the strength of its innovation being in an infringement battle. Allegations of monopoly, abuse of standard setting and antitrust are also not unique to Rambus in the history of patent litigation.
In a real sense, industries with established manufacturers generally will have companies that do not go down without a fight when dealing with companies claiming dominant intellectual property positions and seeking to earn a return from patent licensing. Often that fight involves asserting their own infringement claims and seeking to negotiate a settlement. Since Rambus does not manufacture products the latter path is foreclosed as a remedy.
Certainly the JEDEC standard setting episode has been a learning experience for Rambus. Rambus has since avoided the risk associated with standard setting activity despite having interest in areas that are clear technology markets for the company. These areas include standard development in high speed backplane solutions and PCI express.
Several examples of companies with dominant intellectual property exist in the companies of the Hager portfolios. Qualcomm (QCOM) has a patent litigation history with a host of companies including Motorola, Phillips, Ericsson, and Texas Instruments. In the case of Qualcomm, more often than not, patent litigation cases have resulted in licensing settlements before the patent litigation runs full course. Rambus (RMBS) has also had some success in licensing and settled litigation having licensed Intel, Samsung, Toshiba, Elpida, Hitachi, and others. Rambus however has fixed payments (not royalty payments) agreements with Samsung pending litigation results. In the case of Rambus’ litigation with Infineon, although motivations for settlement exist, we believe the judge has held out so much hope for Infineon to prevail on its counterclaims of Rambus trickery that settlement is elusive at best at the present stage.