Corante

About this Author
Dana Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
About this Site
Moore’s Law defines the history of technology. It held that the number of circuits etched on a given piece of silicon could double every 18 months as far as its author, Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, could see. Moore’s Law has spawned constant revolutions since then, not just in computing but in communications, in science, in a host of areas. Moore’s Law applies to radios, and to optical fiber, but there are some areas where it doesn’t apply. In this blog we’ll take a daily look at new implications of Moore’s Law in real time, as it rolls forward to create our future.
Media Bloggers
In the Pipeline: Don't miss Derek Lowe's excellent commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry in general at In the Pipeline

Moore's Lore

« A CD For Lawyers | Main | State Of Play In E-Mail Marketing »

June 25, 2004

More On Wi-LAN Patent

Email This Entry

Posted by Dana Blankenhorn

Steve Stroh is a highly-recommended stop for anyone interested in wireless technology. He has the sources, the background, and the writing skills to make it come alive.

So I was honored when he chose to respond to my recent piece on Wi-LAN. As usual, he has the facts nailed.

Enjoy.


To be fair, Wi-LAN's OFDM patent predates 802.11a, 802.11g, and 802.16/WiMAX. Wi-LAN was very open (obnoxiously so, at times) about the existence of the patent and that they felt, and planned to enforce, that no one could build 802.11a (and follow-on systems such as 802.11g and 802.16/WiMAX) without running afoul of Wi-LAN's patent.

As a participant in the IEEE standards process, Wi-LAN had to promise to "fairly and impartially" be willing to license the patent to anyone who wants it.

This isn't the first time Wi-LAN has sued Cisco. When Cisco made a Wireless Metropolitan Area Network (WMAN) system, Wi-LAN sued them for this same patent infringement. Cisco ultimately killed that product for reasons unrelated to the Wi-LAN lawsuit (it was an expensive dog of a product). Wi-LAN's is emboldened... or increasingly desperate... into action by their licensing of what they claim are additional key patents for OFDM.

Wi-LAN's purchase of the Lamarr patent was entirely symbolic; what they bought was literally the patent document; having long since expired by the time Wi-LAN bought it, it had worth only as a historical document. The income that Lamarr received from Wi-LAN for the patent was the ONLY income that Lamarr EVER realized from the Lamarr/Antheil patent for Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum.

My take. The use of patents as a business weapon by a company falling of its own weight is what I'm on about. Steve's background knowledge helps document the point.

Patents are a limited right to profit from an invention for a limited time. They are a license to produce. They should not be a license to prevent. The test of a patent's worthiness should include a measure of the holder's own efforts to exploit the patent. And the transferability of patents should be limited. It's a production license, not a legal hunting license.

Comments (0) + TrackBacks (0) | Category: 802.11


TrackBack URL:
http://www.corante.com/cgi-bin/mt/backtar.cgi/6326


EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):




RELATED ENTRIES
The Legend of Dennis Hayes
Evolution Changes Its Mind (Again)
Welcome to 1966
What Must Craigslist Do?
No Such Thing as Free WiFi
The Internet As A Political Issue
Google Images Ruled Illegal
Fall of Radio Shack