Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron have been sued! Accused of colluding to create a "memory apocalypse" and manipulate prices.

Three major memory manufacturers — Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron — were hit with a class-action lawsuit filed by consumers on June 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleges that the three companies conspired to restrict DRAM supply, artificially creating a shortage to drive up prices.

The surge in memory prices has finally ignited legal battles. The three major memory manufacturers — Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron — were hit with a class-action lawsuit filed by consumers on June 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleges that the three companies conspired to restrict DRAM supply, artificially creating a shortage to inflate prices, causing commercial DRAM prices to skyrocket nearly 700% over the past four years. The complaint directly refers to this crisis as a "RAMpocalypse" to describe its severity.

Lawsuit Allegations: Using the shift to HBM as an excuse to deliberately reduce traditional DRAM capacity

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs argue that Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron, leveraging their dominant positions in the global DRAM market, have coordinated to shift capacity toward high-bandwidth memory (HBM) required for AI servers, using this strategic transformation as cover to deliberately cut capacity for traditional commercial memory specifications such as DDR3 and DDR4. The complaint contends that this capacity adjustment, which appears to align with market trends, is actually a strategy by the three companies to collude in controlling supply, creating artificial scarcity to drive up prices. The lawsuit seeks to represent all consumers and businesses that purchased products containing commercial DRAM during the recent price surge, seeking compensation from the three companies.

The complaint also cites Apple's recent broad price increases as evidence that rising memory costs have directly impacted the pricing of end-user consumer electronics, affecting everything from the tech supply chain to individual consumers.

It is reported that the plaintiff list in this case primarily consists of small and medium-sized enterprises and individuals, indicating that the price pressures have directly impacted smaller businesses that rely on memory components for their operations.

Historical Precedent Revisited: Not the First Time for the Three Giants to Be Involved in Price Manipulation Controversies

To strengthen the narrative of a "collusion pattern," the complaint specifically references the past anti-competitive behavior records of the three giants. Both Samsung and SK hynix have previously been fined by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for price manipulation, with combined fines reaching $731 million, and several executives even serving prison time.

In 2005, Samsung was fined $300 million in criminal penalties by the DOJ for engaging in DRAM price manipulation from April 1999 to June 2002. The primary victims at that time included major PC manufacturers like Dell, Apple Computer, IBM, and Gateway, with companies such as Micron, Hynix, Infineon, and Elpida also implicated. This historical record now serves as a key basis for the plaintiffs' legal team to build a "repeat offender" argument.

However, there is a critical difference between this case and the situation in 2005: This time, there is a genuine supply-demand imbalance driven by the surge in AI demand, not merely a fabricated shortage. Furthermore, all three companies claim they are actively building new factories and expanding production lines to meet this wave of demand.

Manufacturers' "New Normal" Claims Spark Controversy; Institutions Warn Price Surge Could Last Until 2027

Amid the lawsuit, many market narratives have emerged suggesting that memory prices will remain high for an extended period. For instance, Lenovo recently publicly warned that the industry is entering a "new normal" for memory prices. However, the timing and motivation behind such statements have also drawn external skepticism. If consumers expect prices to fall next year, they will naturally delay purchasing decisions; conversely, if manufacturers successfully shape market expectations that "price increases are inevitable," they can encourage consumers to place orders earlier, which is clearly more beneficial for their revenue.

Despite doubts about motives, predictions from multiple institutions are indeed worrisome. Jefferies estimates that memory prices in the third quarter of 2026 will rise another 40% to 50% compared to the current quarter, with a further 30% to 40% increase in the fourth quarter; looking ahead to 2027, the full-year price increase is expected to reach 40% to 45%, and prices may not see a substantial easing until 2028.

Under Dual Pressures of Shortage and Lawsuit, Consumers May Be the Biggest Losers

As DRAM manufacturers increasingly enter multi-year supply agreements with strategic major clients such as cloud service providers and AI server manufacturers, it has become the industry norm for capacity to be prioritized for high-profit AI-related orders. This further squeezes the supply available to the standard consumer market — the traditional memory needed for mainstream PCs, laptops, and consumer electronics.

With the convergence of rising AI demand, manufacturers' capacity allocation strategies, and the legal risks triggered by this class-action lawsuit, the supply-demand imbalance and price disputes in the memory industry are expected to remain a focal point of attention in the tech sector for years to come.

• This article is republished with permission from: Chain News
• Original title: "Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron Hit with Class-Action Lawsuit; Three Giants Accused of Colluding to Create 'RAMpocalypse' and Inflate Prices"
• Original author: Crumax