From 722277? Fri Jul 11 11:16:56 1997 ‘Received: from {198.167.244.69)(dave-rambus.com [198.147.244.65)) ‘by jupiter rambus.com (8.8.5 hub-sunos) with SMTP id LAA0698:, Fri tL Jul 1997 11:14:47 -0700 0PDT) rider: mooring@/198,137 244. Message-Id: Mime-Version: LO Content-Type: extpain: charser"us-asci Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 11:20:08 0800 To: whd@mdv.com From: mooring@rambus com (Dave Mooring) Subject: Siemens Stnis Ce: exec@rambus.com X-LIDL: 333bc1718499bs edese? lec 7e6dl bt “The President of the Siemens DRAM Division, Dr. Andreas von Zivewiz. was {at Rambus on July 3. We finalized the terms ofthe deal. He tid they ‘Would sign the contact in July. wil be the last of the top 13 DRAM companies to sign up. In fact they ae the 13th largest vender. Dr. von Zittewite fold us he has £000 total employers. One of them is ‘working on Synclink (SLDRAM), That one engineer is saoned at Mosaid. ‘Mosaid isthe licensing: development firm which is designing the SLDRAM for royahies. We have not yet told Siemens that we think SLORAM and SDRAM-DDR infringe ‘our patents. We think that will jus urique cher. Hopefully, SLDRAM Gnd DDR will die due so their echnicaVinfrastrucrare faults $0 we don't have to play that card. ‘Siemens has been telling the European press that they will ry wo pressure Ine into doing a chipset that suppor the SLDRAM. We have explained thatthe intel contact is public record on the SEC dauabase and that Rambus only wanted 1o engage with Ine! if Intel was deeply commuted to Rambus. As such, the InteVRambus contract can be termunated if Intel supports snother memory interface. ‘We explained 10 Siemens our shared RAD business model. By the time we have complcied the Direct Rambus program Rambus will have expended in excess of 100M. Dr. von Ziuewit seemed 10 understand that the Siemens fees were 1 fais proration of this, “The issue that bas been the largest with Siemens, as with IBM. TI. Fujis, “Mitsubishi, and Micron has been our requirement to pool patents on the Rambus Interface Technology. Iriel has insisted that we not back down on this requirement. We agree with his approach. It delays the conmact ‘gnings substantially, ut makes RDRAMS te last royalty burdened and most open memory standard. We so explained to Siemens that with our RDRAM royalty cap of 2% (per the tur convect with intel) pls the pte pooling, the RDRAM wl be the ean roel burdened DRAM. For example, Smsung is proud o have senled ‘with TI for a billion dollars in royalty payments for DRAM patent RH 386304 TBngement. On the oter side, amoung i gong afer Fupisu and R 233900 OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY ¢x0937-001 |others for SDRAM interface patent infringement ‘Speaking of Samsung, their largest issue appears to be one of contol. We could solve some ofthis by forming 2 Rambus standards comminee and giving Samsung and otbers a vote. Unfortunately, sis isexacly what Intl doesn’t want, Intel needs 8 100% compatible standard par thats quckly developed and commadiized. This isthe opposite of what Samsung wants Ife gave cach DRAM company a vote equal to that of tne, then we end with a real mess, For example, Intel recenly demanded we lower the termination voliage to 1.8 volis; we agreed and ae forcing the ORAM ‘companies 10 this goa; Left wo their own voxng, the DRAM companies would absolutely not have done this. In sumamary. Siemens’ today it fiercely oppositional. After they sign the contact and we have staned 10 suppor them. they should become atleast ‘eutral. 0 far our new licensees have been impressed with ou engineering deliverables they teceived immediately afer contact signing. We will pul ogetber 3 top level smategy, hopefully in conjunction with Amel, that wil: ‘A) Continue to let Intel mect their goals 'B) Minimize the pain wo the DRAM companies ‘So far the B list as been fairy shor, because A has always taken precedence. RH 386395 R 233901 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY ‘¢x0937-002 |