You state:...

"functioning as gate keeper)?..."...lol... If you review my prior post with regard to setting the state of the transistors, you will/might understand that phrase.

Don't take this the wrong way, but so many are invested in something they have no idea what it's about.

As a gate keeper, we have nothing to do with the physical structure of the gates(switches)....we're involved in controlling the gates.

The IP argument of STANSION, is over the physical structure of the switch.

doni"...Just follow the thought...

FIRST:...

Please, do not hold back on expressing yourself. I am trying to get a question answered, and admit readily that I know nothing about the difference between the "physical" and "Logical" or "Software" methodology of "Keeping the gates"...

There is no issue if the SAMSUNGS "Prior Art" Patents claim predates 1994 when Norris First hit the scene. However, we have this company called SAMSUNG, who was in "BED" with EDIG and they were "Huggin each other very closely", ( to quote Sarah) for a long time...

Now we know that NAND is a relatively NEW developement. As I recall AMD, aka STANTION, and others didn't even conceive the idea of "Gate keeping" back in the early 90's when EDIG hit the scene.. Therefore, assuming that SAMSUNG and its 12 engineers who left it to form a side company that for years were THIS CLOSE ,(cross your index finger with the one next to it), learned something from EDIG which gave them the idea of producing FLASH chips in such a manner that will permit the "Gate keeping" which MOS was/is allegedly doing through software control of data dissimination.

If SAMSUNG has EDIG mentioned in their PATENTS which now claim as Prior Art, there may be an argument that SAMSUNG not only owed EDIG for what it used in its widgets that was EDIG tech connected, but they owe on their NAND market also...

Thanks for taking it this far...

Gil...