From the link: "The lawsuit, filed Apr. 27, 2018, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was spurred by a proprietary, independent

From the link: "The lawsuit, filed Apr. 27, 2018, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was spurred by a proprietary, independent investigation by the law firm’s antitrust attorneys who determined that DRAM manufacturers Samsung, Micron and Hynix agreed to limit the supply of DRAM, driving up prices for this widely used memory." No mention of any evidence that this actually happened. The way I read it, the only "proof" they have is that these memory makers hold 96% of the market, and that the prices skyrocketed at some point. Of course, that leaves out what happened with the companies that hold the other 4% of the memory market. If they weren't involved in the scheme, we would expect to see an attempt by them to increase the production of memory to take advantage of the unforeseen boom in memory prices. And if they were involved in the scheme, why aren't they mentioned in the lawsuit? I don't buy this claim at all. Until I see some hard evidence to explain the above, I am inclined to agree with mkempe's conclusion that these lawyers are just parasites.