Corporate & Securities Law

D.C. Circuit Grants Rambus’ FTC Petition For Review

By Matthew S. Wild

Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted Rambus’ petition for review. This decision was much awaited among antitrust counselors because it represented an attempt by the FTC to extend the antitrust laws to cover deceptive practices directed at standard-setting organizations. After administrative proceedings, the FTC held that Rambus violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act by concealing to a standard-setting organization that it held patents in a technology which it urged the organization to adopt. Rambus then allegedly used the organization’s adoption of its technology to overcharge for licenses. In rejecting the claim under Section 2, the court explained, “if JEDEC, in the world that would have existed but for Rambus?s deception, would have standardized the very same technologies, Rambus?s alleged deception cannot be said to have had an effect on competition in violation of the antitrust laws; JEDEC?s loss of an opportunity to seek favorable licensing terms is not as such an antitrust harm. Yet the Commission did not reject this as being a possible?perhaps even the more probable?effect of Rambus?s conduct. We hold, therefore, that the Commission failed to demonstrate that Rambus?s conduct was exclusionary, and thus to establish its claim that Rambus unlawfully monopolized the relevant markets.” Rambus Inc. v. FTC, No. 07-1086 at 19 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 22, 2008). With respect to Section 5 of the FTCA, the court also expressed “serious concerns about strength of the evidence relied on to support some of the Commission?s crucial findings regarding the scope of JEDEC?s patent disclosure policies and Rambus?salleged violation of those policies.” Id. Notably, the court did not address whether such conduct would violate Section 5 even if it could not support liability under the Sherman Act. The FTC has recently taken such a position in its action against Negotiated Data in the March 10, 2008 Post. A copy of the slip opinion in Rambus is attached.

Rambus v. FTC

Full post as published by Antitrust Commentary on April 23, 2008 (boomark / email).