Bay Garrett Open Standards Commitee.” This is an atlempt fo address the concems our customers and partners have sbout the proprietary nature of Rambus >technology. >I am willing to get this off the ground if we agree that itis the thing to >d0. Before we can move forward however, we need to answer lols of questions. internally and come to concensus on what our position is and what our role would be in such a standards organization. > Questions that need to be answered, in no particular order: >What do we call the organization? | have used “REDEC" as a placehokder in >the strawman. Appendix B is alist ofall the words that I could think of >that we could string together to make up a catchy acronym. My belie Is >that the name should NOT contain Rambus, and should contain the words “open >standard.” >How much control does Rambus need to exert in the organization? How can we >maintain control (¥ needed) in an “open organization? ‘There have been two kinds of organizations lke this: 1) a great group of ‘companies form to do something, announce their intentions of delivering and then fizde: Open Unix, Vesa (lately), Mips Reference Piatform, etc. The ‘other one is someone develops a standard and they "give" ito the industry. PCI, SCSI (originally SASI), IBM PC ISA, etc. Intel competed the PC! spec and handed it over to an outside organization, which they started. Ours would have to be diferent. Fist, we want royalties on what we do. So users ofthe echnology would have tobe licensed. ‘Second, we would not want members to create intellectual property that other members could not Use (Icense patent pooting). >Funding. Is the organization self funding, or sponsored by Rambus? if sponsored by Rambus, how do we maintain the appearance of openness? Depends on what we want to do. We could “sel” seats on the Rambus Technical Steering Commitee. | would recommend something like S50K per company, and they have to be licensees. | would make this cover ail meeting expenses, except for fights (Le. we do hotelmeeting costs from the 50K). We hold 4-6 meetings per year: 1) Herein the bay area 2) One in Asia, 3) One in Hawai (central located) and 1-3 more in nice locations; locations that someone like @ Joel Carp would want to go. | think we'd set the agendas, asking member companies to make presentations ‘about things we were interested in from a technology perspective, and then Jead discussions on their keassinputs. RH 360927 | think the best way to run these meetings is that all member companies are allowed to influence future Rambus technology directions, but as inputs into ‘our design process. We'd be responsive and open to their inputs, but it ‘would be us making the real decisions. R 208371 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY ‘¢x0902-001 |sooy > Should meetings be confidential, open to some, open to all, open to the press? Jedec is confidential. | suggest we do the same. . >What isthe benefit tothe participants of joining and contributing? 1) Appesl to the “JEDEC" member group at partners. Get them away from Jedec ‘and participating in our “JEDEC™ because ours is more fun, more focused, more productive, and reflects better on them back st their offices. 2) Have a say in our technical directions, eliminate not invented here syndrome How do we address the question of Rambus being the beneficiary of everybody else's ‘They share each others IP on Rambus DRAMS, and Rambus DRAMS only. A standardized part gets them more sales than a part seemingly proprietary part. >What about IP? AIlIP is shared. We get royalties. This is based on our contract. ‘Advantages to members is that other members can't prevent them from blocking patents, on Rambus DRAMS haven't thought of. I'd ike to Hf there is 2 concensus on moving forward with this, meeting to get our direction sorted out. There >seems to be plenty of downside associated with this f we don' have our >ducks lined up before publicly committing. Jeff Billy Garrett (418) 903-3896 (W) (415) 965-1528 (Fax) RH 360928 R 208372 ‘OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY ‘¢x0902-002 |