IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

“Get Rich, or Die Trying”: Lessons from Rambus' High-Risk Predatory Litigation in the Semiconductor Industry

Listed author(s):
  • Richard Tansey
  • Mark Neal
  • Ray Carroll
Registered author(s):

    Patent litigation is a visible and widespread feature of the semiconductor industry, as firms pursue judicial mechanisms to defend, or promote, their intellectual property portfolios. This study highlights the antecedents, strategic goals, tactics and outcomes of the most significant US trial of this type in the last decade, namely Rambus v. Infineon, whereby a smaller company (Rambus) successfully pursued a “do or die” litigation campaign against a larger rival, thus changing the rules of engagement for the semiconductor industry as a whole. This campaign is notable, not just because of its undoubted effects on the semiconductor industry, but because of the innovative nature of Rambus' strategy, which was extremely risky both in terms of its prospects of success and its potential damage to the company if it failed. Arguing that dominant logic and operating rules are important antecedents in the development and pursuit of patent litigation strategies, this paper analyses the Rambus case using a “dominant logic” and “effectuation” framework. Doing so demonstrates the innovative nature of Rambus' “high-risk predatory strategy”, the outcome of a dominant logic sustained by effectuation principles. The paper discusses the impact and significance of this new strategic form.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Industry and Innovation.

    Volume (Year): 12 (2005)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 93-115

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:93-115
    DOI: 10.1080/1366271042000339076
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:93-115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.