News & Analysis
Comment
Lionlair
What I see might be an act that intended to prevent not the small guys but a ...
Robotics Developer
I wonder how much of this is an attempt to pressure Cypress by GSI related to ...
Suit alleges collusion by SRAM vendors
Dylan McGrath
7/25/2011 11:53 AM EDT
SAN FRANCISCO—Static random access memory (SRAM) vendor GSI Technology Inc. said Monday (July 25) that it filed a complaint in U.S. federal court alleging that Cypress Semiconductor Corp. and other SRAM vendors participated in a conspiracy to monopolize the market for high-performance SRAMs.
GSI (Sunnyvale, Calif.) also announced that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) said last week it would formally investigate a patent infringement complaint filed last month against the company by Cypress (San Jose, Calif.).
GSI said its complaint against Cypress, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges that Cypress and other co-conspirators engaged in anti-competitive, collusive and conspiratorial conduct that violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act and also constitutes unlawful restraint of trade and unfair competition under California law. The alleged co-conspirators mentioned in the complaint include Micron Technology Inc., Integrated Device Technology Inc., NEC Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Hitachi Ltd. and Renesas Technology Corp.
The complaint alleges that Cypress and the other companies manipulated the SRAM market by setting standards amongst themselves in a closed setting, rather than using an open standards body such as Jedec.
The companies allegedly banded together "to protect their members' SRAM market shares by excluding their competitors from having access to information describing the specific form, fit and function specifications and information that would otherwise be available in an open and public standards body such as Jedec or IEEE," the complain states. "Their illegal combination and conspiracy permitted the consortium members to control the market by keeping networking SRAM prices high, locking in the limited number of consumers of networking SRAM before competitors could develop and market competing products and stalling the introduction of competitive products."
The high-performance SRAM devices at issue in the district court case are known as fast synchronous quad data rate (QDR) SRAMs and double data rate (DDR) SRAMs, GSI said.
The GSI complaint seeks undetermined damages, an injunction prohibiting the continuation of the allegedly illegal business practices and recovery of GSI's attorneys' fees and costs, GSI said.
Cypress did not immediately respond to a request for comment on GSI's suit.
Cypress earlier this year filed a complaint against GSI in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota alleging five counts of patent infringement, principally related to GSI's Sigma Quad and Sigma DDR families of SRAM products. The ITC complaint alleges infringement by GSI of four patents and also alleges infringement by two of GSI's distributors and three of GSI's customers who allegedly incorporate GSI's SRAMs in their products.
The Cypress ITC complaint seeks a limited exclusion order excluding the allegedly infringing SRAMs, and products containing them, from entry into the U.S. and permanent orders directing GSI and the other proposed respondents to cease and desist from selling or distributing such products in the U.S.
GSI said it believes that it has "meritorious defenses" to Cypress infringement claims and intends to defend itself vigorously in the ITC proceeding while also vigorously prosecuting its antitrust claims against Cypress.
GSI (Sunnyvale, Calif.) also announced that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) said last week it would formally investigate a patent infringement complaint filed last month against the company by Cypress (San Jose, Calif.).
GSI said its complaint against Cypress, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges that Cypress and other co-conspirators engaged in anti-competitive, collusive and conspiratorial conduct that violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act and also constitutes unlawful restraint of trade and unfair competition under California law. The alleged co-conspirators mentioned in the complaint include Micron Technology Inc., Integrated Device Technology Inc., NEC Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Hitachi Ltd. and Renesas Technology Corp.
The complaint alleges that Cypress and the other companies manipulated the SRAM market by setting standards amongst themselves in a closed setting, rather than using an open standards body such as Jedec.
The companies allegedly banded together "to protect their members' SRAM market shares by excluding their competitors from having access to information describing the specific form, fit and function specifications and information that would otherwise be available in an open and public standards body such as Jedec or IEEE," the complain states. "Their illegal combination and conspiracy permitted the consortium members to control the market by keeping networking SRAM prices high, locking in the limited number of consumers of networking SRAM before competitors could develop and market competing products and stalling the introduction of competitive products."
The high-performance SRAM devices at issue in the district court case are known as fast synchronous quad data rate (QDR) SRAMs and double data rate (DDR) SRAMs, GSI said.
The GSI complaint seeks undetermined damages, an injunction prohibiting the continuation of the allegedly illegal business practices and recovery of GSI's attorneys' fees and costs, GSI said.
Cypress did not immediately respond to a request for comment on GSI's suit.
Cypress earlier this year filed a complaint against GSI in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota alleging five counts of patent infringement, principally related to GSI's Sigma Quad and Sigma DDR families of SRAM products. The ITC complaint alleges infringement by GSI of four patents and also alleges infringement by two of GSI's distributors and three of GSI's customers who allegedly incorporate GSI's SRAMs in their products.
The Cypress ITC complaint seeks a limited exclusion order excluding the allegedly infringing SRAMs, and products containing them, from entry into the U.S. and permanent orders directing GSI and the other proposed respondents to cease and desist from selling or distributing such products in the U.S.
GSI said it believes that it has "meritorious defenses" to Cypress infringement claims and intends to defend itself vigorously in the ITC proceeding while also vigorously prosecuting its antitrust claims against Cypress.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
Robotics Developer
7/25/2011 4:46 PM EDT
I wonder how much of this is an attempt to pressure Cypress by GSI related to the patent infringement lawsuit? It is not clear to me what the issue is with multiple companies getting together and agreeing on a form factor or feature set for related products. This sort of industry coalition should be OK, but if they discussed keeping the pricing higher or other means of excluding GSI/competitors that would be a different story. I guest the devil is in the details..
Sign in to Reply
Lionlair
7/25/2011 10:34 PM EDT
What I see might be an act that intended to prevent not the small guys but a predator company that lives on their patents - many of which were developed in JEDEC that caused havoc with the semiconductor industry by forcing payment for what members developed in meetings. I suspect GSI was invited or would have been informed but then kicking dust at others prevent their being kind back.
Sign in to Reply