by A Thinker on Jun 28th, 2008 @ 7:43am

Mr. Mike-You are probably just one of those that hate the whole system of law in the US. This company and it's inventions were very important to the beginning of the whole digital era. They worked and collaborated with Intel, IBM, Samsung and many, many more in the early days of falsh memory. You really need to get the chip off of your shoulder and study history a little bit before running off your mouth with no facts at all. I am actually embarassed by people like you-why would any reputable company allow your articles to be published at all anywhere.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...
http://www.allbusiness.c om/company-activities-management/boa...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph -Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&... =G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&a... (look at the references)

(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

• by A Thinker on Jun 28th, 2008 @ 7:45am

  Line 3 should say "flash memory".

  (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

• Re: by Mike on Jun 29th, 2008 @ 10:40pm

  Mr. Mike-You are probably just one of those that hate the whole system of law in the US.
  
  Not at all. I find it amusing that you accuse me of not knowing anything and making assumptions, and then you break that out. My opinions are quite clear. If you are going to yell at me for not doing research, you might want to start out by actually doing some research yourself.
  
  Or is that too difficult?

  (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

  • Re: Re: by A Thinker on Jun 30th, 2008 @ 6:10am

    Mr. Mike-Did you look at any of the links that were provided? I have done more research on this company in the last 15 years than you have probably done on everything you have researched total. Notice the qualifier 'probably'. The point is that you aren't learned enough in this area to even make an opinion, other than exactly what you did. That is to slam a company who made some very important inventions that affect some of the technology that you use today.
    
    Let's suppose that someone, in their garage, invents a detailed method for building a car engine that gets one hundred miles to the gallon and then files and receives a patent on it. This person does not have the funds to build a manufacturing plant to build the engine or can't really market the invention properly. He goes out and tries to talk to large companies to get something going, but has no luck. The companies look at the idea and realize that this method would work. They take the idea and add a thing or two because technology may have changed a little since the invention. They then mass produce the engine and sell it all over the world for the next few years, without any regard whatsoever for the patent holder. Not only that, but large companines all over the world begin making engines using the same technology also. As time and years go by, even though the same engine had actually morphed into something totally different because of new technology, the fact is that it wouldn't have happened in the first place had the patented method not happened.
    
    My question to you-should the patent holder have any right to file a suit to recover anything because of this situation.
    
    These inventions were far more important that you understand. I and a lot of others here have done our research; the problem is that we don't have time to do the research for you too.
    
    Good luck to you.

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

    • Re: Re: Re: by angry dude on Jun 30th, 2008 @ 6:40am

      Come on, dude
      
      What do you expect from Mikey ?
      
      Everybody and his dog knows that Mikey is a corporate stooge