- Oct 27, 2000
- 9,951
- 570
- 136
Now THIS is good reading hahaha! Here is the article
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/17503.html
Here is what Toms had posted about it...
<< Mike Magee of The Register reports that Rambus Inc., in its SDRAM patent struggle with Infineon, has filed a response meant to discredit the testimony of one Richard Crisp, an ex-employee of the company. The document introduced by Rambus states that Crisp's association with the company ended in 1996, making anything he might say after that date irrelevant and presumably speculative.
However, Magee points out that Crisp was introducing himself only last year at Computex as an executive of the company and was able to arrange a meeting, in that capacity, between other Rambus executives, himself and Dr. Thomas Pabst. This raises the interesting possibility, alluded to by Magee, that he and/or Pabst could conceivably be called to testify in the upcoming trial. >>
Hahaha! If Tom got to testify against Rambus that would be hilarious!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/17503.html
Here is what Toms had posted about it...
<< Mike Magee of The Register reports that Rambus Inc., in its SDRAM patent struggle with Infineon, has filed a response meant to discredit the testimony of one Richard Crisp, an ex-employee of the company. The document introduced by Rambus states that Crisp's association with the company ended in 1996, making anything he might say after that date irrelevant and presumably speculative.
However, Magee points out that Crisp was introducing himself only last year at Computex as an executive of the company and was able to arrange a meeting, in that capacity, between other Rambus executives, himself and Dr. Thomas Pabst. This raises the interesting possibility, alluded to by Magee, that he and/or Pabst could conceivably be called to testify in the upcoming trial. >>
Hahaha! If Tom got to testify against Rambus that would be hilarious!
Facebook
Twitter