A court has ruled that DRAM makers fixed prices between 1998 and 2002

Mar 9, 2014 16:17 GMT  ·  By

If one were to make a list of all the lawsuits going around in the technology industry, I have little doubt that many of those laying their hands on said list could very well end up staring wide-eyed just because of how long it is.

As such, I would normally not fan the flames. I, myself, usually try not to dwell too much on all the patent wars, accusations of trade secret theft, and monetary damage demands that crop up so very often.

But this past week, one very specific lawsuit concluded. Well, not exactly. More like an investigation was finally completed, the one that was trying to figure out if DRAM makers fixed prices between 1998 and 2002.

It turns out that they did, and the ruling at the conclusion of the DRAM Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation led to the creation of dramclaims.com, a website where anyone who bought computer products during that period could make a claim and get some of their money back.

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California presided over a number of different cases. The investigations and lawsuits concluded with cumulative settlements of around $310 million / €223 million.

But because the wounded party, as it were, was the general public, no one other than the people who bought the memory have any claim to the cash.

The ramifications

It sounds like a lot, right? $300 million / €223 million is a nice, healthy sum, no question. Unfortunately, the “general public” is big, and so is the number of people who bought memory between 1998 and 2003.

Sure, only the ones who made “indirect” purchases count (ergo, people who bought game consoles, PCs or other electronics devices pre-fitted with memory, not if you bought straight from the DRAM maker itself), but even then the number can be pretty big.

And ultimately, you’ll only get back the money you paid extra, unlawfully. Which might near $1,000 / €720 if you purchased something really beefy during that time. Alas, most people won’t get more than $10 / €7 or so.

So now the question of questions comes in: now that you have the chance to get even, as it were, with those who scammed you, will you do it? Even if it’s just for 10 bucks?

The odds

The website I mentioned above was put together to make it easy for the eligible consumers to stake a claim of however much of the cash they are due.

In theory, it shouldn’t be too difficult to make a claim. You don’t even need the proof of purchase, although it’s hinted that it would probably help. It just takes 5 minutes to fill up the online form.

Also, with how easy it is today to transfer money between accounts, electronically, the refund (partial refund anyway) should reach you easily enough.

So thus we reach the big question: will you do it? Even if it’s just 10 bucks that you’re owed?

I’m sure that some people will jump at the chance, just because they want to win a round against the system, only to prove to themselves that it’s still possible. I’m also sure that there could be some who need the cash, no matter how little.

But what about those that aren’t strapped for money or otherwise concerned over all this? What will they do? Will they trudge through the marshes of virtual paperwork, or will they just find the whole thing too troublesome? The incentive

For one, you won’t actually be suing the DRAM makers. As in, you won’t be doing anything. No filing, no statements, no signatures (mostly), no lawyers, etc. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has already done that on your behalf.

Well, technically you are suing them, because the deadline to comment on or object to the settlements or request for fees (or to opt out) is still a ways off, on May 5. You just don’t have to do any of the work. Also, The Court will only hold a hearing to consider whether to approve the settlements and award fees on June 25. After that, you’ll have until August 1 to file a claim online or by mail.

So, in essence, the info or request/demand you send before May 5 may influence the result of the final court gathering.

Alas, many people probably won’t even remember exactly what they bought and when, or from who, so many years ago (over a decade has passed after all). So it’s pretty likely that the court will get far fewer e-mails than they hoped.

Although the fewer they are, the less filing work the clerks will have to do, and have to catch up by the time the deadline comes in, so I suppose some people will be happy or relieved with that. Then again, there’s always a silver lining.

I, for one, am not eligible, since I didn’t buy much in terms of electronics between 1998 and 2002, but those who think they are subject to the settlement might want to at least send an e-mail via the website. You see, you can stake a claim, or you can explain why you don’t like the Settlements by May 5, but there’s another, possibly very important item that consumers might miss, because it’s only included in the Detailed Notice.

See, if you don’t send a mail to make a claim or exclude yourself from the settlements, you lose the right to sue the defendants separately. So, doing nothing is not advised, although, granted, if you’re not likely to get more than 10 bucks, it’s probably not worth pondering anyhow. Fortunately, you still have until May 5 to decide what to do.

In case you were wondering, the list of defendants includes, but is not limited to, Elpida, Hitachi, Micron, NEC, Toshiba and Mitsubishi.