I read the original complaint in this case when it was filed and I think it's a nothing burger. They admit outright that the reduction in supply is because the suppliers are making HBM instead, where they have infinite demand and are making more money.
Going after the memory suppliers is fashionable because they've gotten in trouble for collusion before-- but the claim's own text really undermines the collusion argument.
A more interesting question is probably: did large AI companies buy out the ram supply using their fountains of investor money in order to suppress competition in AI ... but that isn't a question that will be explored by this case.
Going after the memory suppliers is fashionable because they've gotten in trouble for collusion before-- but the claim's own text really undermines the collusion argument.
A more interesting question is probably: did large AI companies buy out the ram supply using their fountains of investor money in order to suppress competition in AI ... but that isn't a question that will be explored by this case.