From 772@?”? Fri Jul 11 14:42:53 1997 Recewed: From roadshow-95.rambus com (roadshow-95 rambus com (198.147.2487 ‘by jupiter.rambus.com (8 8.5/hub-sunos) with SMTP id OAA16084: Fn, 11 Jul 1997 14:38:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <3.0.32,19970711 140958,00ed4ef4@198.147.244.4> N-Sender gate@198.147.244.4 X-Mailer Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0(32), Date: Fr, 11 Jul 1997 14:37:51 0700 To: fleming @ramibus com, robers@rambus com From: Geoff Tate Subject: FW: DRAM Suppliers and Rambus Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: texuplain; charser="us-asci X-UIDL: 341290032 le6fec0690MDe48breb6b | >From: Bill Davidow >To. "Mooring, Dave" , > "Tate, Geoff" > >Subject: FW: DRAM Suppliers nd Rambus >Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 14:06:18 -0700 ‘SI sent Dave's memo with minor modifactions and my lead paragraph. >>From: Bill Davidow >Sent: Friday, July 11, 1997 2:08 PM >oTo: Parker, Gey” >Subject: DRAM Suppliers and Rambus Gerry, Ihave been discussing the DRAM Company problem with Rambus. Below ‘Sone of the updates, One of the things we have avoided discussing with our S>parnets is imellectual property problem discussed inthe fourth paragraph. So We feel that it would drive a deeper wedge between us some of them and that ‘>>maybe the problem will solve itself with time. We are hoping that they will ‘either drop their competitive efforts or discover for themselves that they >have violated Rambus patents and will conclude that geting around them will be either extremely difficult or impossible and wil take a lot of time. >>BELOW IS THE RAMBUS UPDATE >>The President ofthe Siemens DRAM Division, Dr. Andreas von Zitsewitz, was oat Rambus on July 3. We finalized the terms ofthe deal, He said they >>would sign the contract in July ‘>They willbe the last ofthe top 13 DRAM companies to signup. In fact S>they are the [3th largest vendor. >>Dr. von Zitsewitz told us he has $000 total employees. One of them is working on Synclink (SLDRAM). That one engineer i stationed at Mosaid, SMosaidis the licensing'development firm which is designing the SLDRAM for >>royaltes. ‘S5We have not yet tld Siemens that we think SLDRAM and SDRAM-DDR intfinge Sour patents. We think that will ust imitate them. Hopefully, SLDRAM RH 386396 R 233902 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY cx0938-001>>and DDR wil die due to ther technicalinfrastuctute faults so we don't Sohave wo play that ard 2>siemens hasbeen telling te European press ha thy will ey 0 pressure tne into doing a chpset that support the SLDRAM. >We explained to Siemens our shared R&D business model, By the time we have S>completed the Direct Rambus program, Rambus will have expended in excess of SSSIOOM, Dr. von Zisewitz seemed to understand that he Siemens’ fees were 35a fir poration of thi >>The issue that hasbeen the largest with Siemens as with [BM, Tl, Fujitsu S>Misubisi and Micro hasbeen our requirement o pool patents onthe Rambus Interface Technology. atl has insisted that we not bck down on Soihis requirement. We agree wath this approach. [¢ delays the contact SPsignings substantially bu makes RDRAMG the least royalty burdened and >>most open memory standard >>.We also explained to Siemens that with out RDRAM royalty cap of 2% (per the S>our contract with Intl) plus the patent pooling, the RDRAM will be the leas royalty burdened DRAM, For example, Samsung is proud to ave seed >with TT Tora billion dollars in royalty payments for DRAM patent SSintingement. On the other sie, Samsung is going after Fujitsu and others for SDRAM interface patent infngement Speaking of Samsung, thir largest issue appears tobe one of control. We could solve some of tis by formung a Rambus standards comme and giving SSSamsung and others a vote, Unfortunately ths exactly wha Intl Dodocsit want. Intel need a 100% compatible standard part that is quickly >odeveloped and commoditized. This isthe opposite of what Samsung wants Soit we gave each DRAM company a vote equa o that of Il, then we could Spend op witha ceal mess. For example, Ine recently demanded we lower the >oterminaton voltage to 1.8 volts; we agreed and are forcing the DRAM. >>companies fo this goal; ie to their own votng, the DRAM companies would SSabsoutely nor have done this. >in summary, Siemens today is fercely oppositional. After they sign the SSeonract and we Have stated fo suppor them they should become at east Snel. So far our new licensees have been impressed with our >SSenginering deliverables they received immediately afer contac signing 2>:We wil pt together atop level strategy, hopefully in conjunction with late, hat wil: 35) Contin tlt ftel meet heir goals 358) Minimize the pain tothe DRAM companies >So far the B ist hasbeen fail shor, because A has always taken Doprecedence > RH 386397 Geof Tate R 233903 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY ‘cx0938-002Rambus ‘Tel 415.903.3807 PAX 415-965-1528 **NOTE: THIS EMAIL MAY CONTAIN RAMBUS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION** RH 386398 R 233904 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY “ex0938-003