Rambus makes technology that goes into dynamic random access
memory (DRAM) systems. The FTC says its behaviour held up the
development of the DRAM industry, which used the Joint Electron
Device Engineering Council (JEDEC) in the early days of DRAM
development to decide how the technology should progress.
The FTC has said that it believes that Rambus misled the
consortium in a manner which benefited the company at the expense
of the industry and of competition. JEDEC was attempting to set the
technical standards that would govern DRAM.
JEDEC "maintained a commitment to avoid, where possible, the
incorporation of patented technologies into its published
standards, or at a minimum to ensure that such technologies, if
incorporated, will be available to be licensed on royalty-free or
otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory terms," said the FTC
ruling.
Rambus, said the FTC, deceived the standards body. "Rambus
nonetheless participated in JEDEC’s DRAM standard-setting
activities for more than four years without disclosing to JEDEC or
its members that it was actively working to develop, and possessed,
a patent and several pending patent applications that involved
specific technologies ultimately adopted in the standards," said an
FTC statement.
"Rambus understood that knowledge of its evolving patent
position would be material to JEDEC’s choices, and avoided
disclosure for that very reason," said the ruling from the FTC.
"Through its successful strategy, Rambus was able to conceal its
patents and patent applications until after the standards were
adopted and the market was locked in. Only then did Rambus reveal
its patents – through patent infringement lawsuits against JEDEC
members who practiced the standard."
The FTC will now hold further meetings to decide what penalty to
apply. It said that the company will be liable for financial
damages.
Rambus said in a conference call with analysts that it was
likely to appeal the ruling.
The decision overturns a 2004 verdict by an FTC administrative
law judge which said that the FTC had not proven its case.
