patent infringement

Sprint sues little guys over VoIP patents

Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:59:55 -0500

Following up on its $80 million settlement from its Vonage lawsuit last year, Sprint is milking its 115 VoIP patents by suing NuVox Communications, Broadvox Holdings, Big River Telephone and Paetec Communications. The carrier claims the four companies are violating six of its patents and is seeking both damages and an injunction. Reportedly, Sprint did not try to negotiate a licensing agreement with any of the companies before filing the lawsuit. GigaOM quipped that Sprint may see patent litigation as an easier means to cashflow than its much needed corporate turnaround.

For more on the suits:
- read this report from GigaOM
- take a look at this release

Related articles:
Vonage faces Sprint suit Report
Sprint sues Vonage, others, over patents Report

Buffalo Technology halts 802.11a/g sales in U.S.

Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:59:57 -0400

WiFi vendor Buffalo Technology told its customers that it has been enjoined as of Oct. 1 from selling 802.11a and g equipment in the U.S. as a result of patent litigation brought on by Australian technology research agency CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization). CSIRO holds a broad patent for WLAN technology.

The CSIRO was granted its patent (#5487069) more than 10 years ago but turned to sue Buffalo Technology for patent infringement in 2005. In June, a Texas court issued the injunction against Buffalo after it lost the patent lawsuit last November. Buffalo is appealing.

All WiFi players are fighting CSIRO's patent claims. CSIRO's lawsuits are against the entire wireless LAN industry and could affect the supply of wireless LAN products by any manufacturer, not just Buffalo. According to Buffalo's web site: "The entire industry is resisting CSIRO's attempts to enjoin the sale of wireless LAN products. Recently, Microsoft, 3COM Corporation, SMC Networks, Accton Technology Corporation, Intel, Atheros Communications, Belkin International, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Nortel Networks, Nvidia Corporation, Oracle Corporation, SAP AG, Yahoo, Nokia, and the Consumer Electronics Association filed briefs in support of Buffalo's position that injunctive relief is inappropriate in this case."

Buffalo can sell existing inventories and has permission to replace products under warranty. Certainly the WiFi industry wants to fight this to avoid adding costs to WiFi equipment. One of the reasons WiFi has proliferated is because of how cheap equipment is.

When it comes to 802.11n, the CSIRO recently said it won't give the IEEE its assurance that it will refrain from suing companies that release next-generation WiFi equipment based on the draft of that standard.

To read more about Buffalo's injunction:
- take a look at this report from Wi-Fi Net News
- read Buffalo's web site

Aruba counter sues Motorola over WLAN patents

Mon, 22 Oct 2007 06:59:55 -0400

Aruba Networks has counter sued Motorola over WLAN patents, bringing some interesting drama to the WLAN space. In August, Motorola's subsidiaries Symbol Technologies and Wireless Valley Communications filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court of Delaware against Aruba for alleged patent infringement. The suit concerns Aruba's alleged infringement of patents related to WLAN technologies. The four disputed patents relate to WLAN switching architecture technology and WLAN site planning and RF management.

For its part, Aruba claims Symbol knew enough about Aruba's products in 2003 to indicate they might infringe on Symbol's pending patents. Aruba also says both Symbol and Wireless Valley withheld information from patent examiners, making the patents invalid. In its counter suit, Aruba is seeking declaratory judgments that it has not infringed and that the patents are invalid and not enforceable. Aruba is asking that Symbol and Wireless Valley pay the costs of the suit and its attorney fees.

Interestingly, Symbol was close to acquiring Aruba in 2003, Aruba claims. During the first half of the year, Symbol had "essentially unfettered access" to information about how Aruba's products were made as the two discussed a deal, Aruba said in a filing. The inventor of two of the patents involved in the suit was one of the engineers inspecting Aruba's technology, Aruba said. A deal was never made because the two companies couldn't agree on terms.

To find out more about the counter suit:
- read this story from IDG News Service

Motorola sues Aruba over WLAN patents

Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:59:55 -0400

Motorola's subsidiaries Symbol Technologies and Wireless Valley Communications have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court of Delaware against Aruba Networks for alleged patent infringement. The suit concerns Aruba's alleged infringement of patents related to WLAN technologies. The four disputed patents relate to WLAN switching architecture technology and WLAN site planning and RF management.

According to Motorola, Symbol introduced the first modern wireless switch architecture, which significantly lowered the cost of deploying network infrastructure and of managing, maintaining and upgrading wireless systems.

The company also says that Wireless Valley introduced the concept of using a predictive design approach, a three-dimensional representation of an environment, and site specific information in the design, implementation and management of wireless networks in and around buildings.

Symbol and Wireless Valley want a permanent injunction against Aruba and monetary damages for using the patented technologies. Symbol has indicated that Aruba might not be the only company infringing its patents.

For more on the lawsuit:
- read this press release
- take a look at this article from EE Times

Nokia asks ITC to ban Qualcomm imports

Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:59:56 -0400

Nokia asked the International Trade Commission (ITC) to ban imports of certain Qualcomm chipsets and handsets that it claims infringe on five of its patents. This reads like a re-run of the Broadcom case against Qualcomm, and that's exactly what Nokia wants it to read like. Similarly to Broadcom, Nokia says the alleged patent infringement involves patents for technologies that improve performance and efficiency of wireless phones.

"We are taking this action to stop Qualcomm's practice of copying Nokia's patented technology, without permission, and making these innovations available to its chipset customers," Nokia's CFO Rick Simonson said.

Qualcomm has already filed complaints against Nokia for allegedly infringing on six of its patents and the commission is expected to convene a trial on those accusations next month.

For more on the Nokia-Qualcomm ITC battle:
- read this WSJ article (sub. req.)

ALSO NOTED: Consortium wins Sacramento WiFi network build; Pulse Link sues Tzero over UWB patent; and much more...

Mon, 25 Jun 2007 06:59:51 -0400

> Sacramento Metro Connect, a consortium of Azulstar, Cisco Systems, Intel and SeaKay, will build and operate a wireless broadband network for Sacramento. Article

> Pulse Link is suing Tzero Technologies for patent infringement associated with UWB technology. Article

> Proxim wireless solutions are connecting India's rural communities. Release

> AT&T is adding about 2,000 temporary employees to cope with the influx of shoppers it expects for the iPhone. Article (WSJ sub. req.)

And Finally... Toledo's WiFi director walked out of a weekly staff meeting after what she claimed was verbal abuse by the mayor over preparation for an upcoming meeting with the city council about MetroFi's proposal to build a WiFi network in the city. Article

Qualcomm sues Nokia

Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:01:39 -0400

The London weekly The New Statesman holds an annual competition for the most boring, platitudinous, boring, not-telling-us-anything-we-don't know-already newspaper headline. A couple of years ago, for example, a London Times headline won: "In India, wherever you go there are people." My contribution to the competition would be: "Qualcomm sues for patent infringement" (the good thing about this headline: You can use it every year). Qualcomm has earned a well-deserved reputation as a sharp-elbowed, litigation-happy company ready to sue other companies for patent rights infringement at a drop of a hat. Many suspect that most of the company's income comes from royalties (ABI's Phil Solis says that only about a third of the company's income comes from royalties). Players in the WiMAX sphere have been nervous ever since Qualcomm has acquired Flarion, a company with a portfolio of WiMAX-related patents. It is only a question of time before Qualcomm builds a toll booth and begin the charge other companies for its WiMAX patents. Solis says that WiMAX companies had better begin to include such royalty payments as the cost of doing business.

A taste of what is to come is on display as Qualcomm has just fired yet another round in its on-going war with Nokia. In a complaint filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission last week Qualcomm says that Nokia is engaging in unfair trade practices by importing and selling certain mobile phones which, what else, infringe on six Qualcomm patents. The complaint is the latest indication that Qualcomm and Nokia are struggling to renegotiate a licensing contract between the two which is set to expire in early 2007. Nokia responded that the legal activities reflect Qualcomm's concern over the negotiations, and that Nokia has a stronger patent position now than it did in the 1990s.

Qualcomm owns the bulk of the intellectual property behind the CDMA standard and thus earns substantial royalty profits when companies such Nokia make CDMA products. Mobile phone networks in most places in the world, however, are migrating to W-CDMA, a standard created from intellectual property submitted by many companies. Nokia emphasized that it has far more essential patents for the standard than Qualcomm.

The trade commission filing is similar to other lawsuits filed by Qualcomm in the US and the UK which charge Nokia with infringing on patents in its GSM products. This surprised some observers -- how could Qualcomm sue Nokia over improvements in GSM when GSM is an older technology than CDMA? Leave it to Qualcomm's lawyers: They argue that the competition fro CDMA force other companies to improve the older GSM, so that GSM now infringes on CDMA patents.

For more on the Qualcomm-Nokia battle
-see Nancy Gohring's Techworld report

Analysis: Patent litigation at crossroads

Tue, 06 Dec 2005 19:01:38 -0500

Fights over patents are becoming more pervasive and more consequential. Three examples: The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of MercExchange, a small Virginia company, against auction giant eBay (the issue before the Court is whether lower courts must issue an injunction if they suspect a patent infringement, or whether they have some leeway); BlackBerry may be forced into ceasing operation in North America owing to an ongoing battle with NTP; and a Senate committee has just approved an extension of patent rights to pharmaceutical companies on general drugs in order to give an incentive to these companies to develop vaccines against bioterror weapons.

With patent-related issues coming more and more to the fore, it is good to see Cisco agreeing to settle its patent dispute with Toronto-based Wi-LAN. Not everyone is happy, however. Critics charge that the legal actions taken by MercExchange and NTP are examples of greedy patent trolls. NTP and MercExchange have little core business of their own but hold enforceable patents related to widespread technology used in products from larger, better known firms.

Wi-LAN's case is different as the company could hardly be described as a mere troll. Experts agree that the company's patent claims were substantial and that these claims would likely have been held up on appeal. Moreover, the company has promised "fairly and impartially" to license the technology to anyone who wants to use it. Wi-LAN was founded in 1992 and holds several patents related to OFDM and WiMax. In any event, more important for the wireless world are the patent-related questions of QUALCOMM's acquisition of Flarion Technologies, which gives QUALCOMM a major intellectual-property position in emerging wireless technologies.

Which brings us back to MercExchange vs. eBay. The hope here is that the Supreme Court would rule to allow judges more leeway in decisions involving complex patents. Such leeway would mean that even if the court suspects that patents on a small component of a larger system have been infringed, the court would not be mandated--as currently is the case--to issue a sweeping injunction causing major disruption to, or even a shut-down of, major companies and systems. Rather judges would be allowed to award damages relating only to specific, patented components of larger systems. The Supreme Court will go a long way toward introducing more sanity into US business jurisprudence if it were to give the lower courts the ability to exercise more discretion in finding for plaintiffs.

For more on Cisco's move:
- see Richard Martin's Unstrung report
For more on patent issues in the US:
- see Patti Waldmeir's Financial Times discussion (sub. req.)