Slashdot Mirror
Intermec Claims RFID is Proprietary
seeks2know writes "Line56.com reports that Intermec is claiming patents on RFID chips, readers, and tags. They have launched their first lawsuit against Matrics. They seek to sell licenses to all RFID manufacturers. Erik Michielsen of ABI Research states '...this definitely clouds the UHF Generation 2 standards discussions and is fueling considerable animosity in the industry.'
Interestingly, the patents that Intermec is claiming were acquired in their acquisition of IBM's RFID laboratory in December, 1997. Another case of a submarine patent strategy?"
the evil of patents for good. Hmm, I think my head might explode.
That's not the way to handle a submarine patent. Everyone knows what you're SUPPOSED to do is wait until every large and small company is using RFID and become totally dependant on it. THEN you hit them with the licensing and lawsuits. How do you expect to make any money if you stifle this before it gets really big. Bad Intermec! Bad dog!
Let the litigation begin!
Maybe this will delay RFID rollouts untill some of the privacy issues are fixed?
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
It is quite difficult to believe that IBM, the warehouse of over 10,000 patents sells a new industry in a sell-off. If they have the patents for RFID, I doubt they swindled it from IBM.
"Engineers do the work of man, Physicists do the work of God"
how various luminaries react to this. I'd like to hear Stallman's take on this.
This is great. Even though submarine patents are not a good thing (my opinion) here we win either way. Many companies are annoyed by the patent on something they thought was an open standard, and RFID tag adoption is hindered.
Error 404 - Sig Not Found
(Unwarranted?) privacy concerns aside, RFID will make goods cheaper by reducing shrinkage and the time taken from employees to hunt for a barcode. Now the money will go into someone else's pocket instead of staying in your own.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
If you go and patent something, get on the ball and stop people from copying your ideas from the get go, rather than waiting 7 years, until apparently the tech has caught on, and then trying to make all your real money through litigation!!
Assholes.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If it were possible for someone to legally place a toll boothe at the bottom of your driveway and charge you a dollar every time you want to drive anywhere regardless of the fact they do not contribute to the road, the driveway or yourself how long before someone would do so?
The answer is less than a New York minute.
Now someone can place a toll boothe for the use of an international standard, and despite the fact they probably did not contribute to that, then do you blame them for doing so?
It is blatantly obvious that some laws need changing, however, as long as the toll booth owners have the ears of the legislators the problem needs to be passed to the voters.
Things do not look good.
Web Sig: Eddy Currents
I am pretty sure I didn't get to wander away from work as much as our public servants do, when I had a "real" job [Now that I work for myself, hey, If I run the kid down to the pool for an hour, who cares?].
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
" Hmm, I think my head might explode."
Sorry. I have a patent on that. Pay up, then blow up.
I wonder when Wal-Mart wil step into this fray and slap the combatants until all they can see is little yellow smiley faces. Wal-Mart seems pretty serious about RFID and won't be happy if the vendors start squabbling over IP rights.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Hey, 2 wrongs really DO make a right.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
The government agency I work at uses RFID for security! These guys are terrorists.
If this patent is valid, and Intermec raises the license fees high enough, it could kill RFID before the technology has really come into its own. What side will CASPIAN come down on? Will IBM stand idly by and let this happen? Will other tinfoil-hat-wearing consumer groups seize on this patent, or try to buy it outright to effectively halt the implementation of RFID?
This has the potential to fracture EFF and PubPat too, seeing as the privacy nuts will be all for anything that makes it harder or more expensive for RFID to become ubiquitous, but this sounds like a job for PubPat (or some other private entitiy) to investigate, to protect the very real benefits that RFID will bring to supply chain management.
or will this be a case where the Feds stand up to fight against a technology patent, now that the DOD has declared that all if its suppliers must use RFID by Jan 1 2005? Can the government claim eminent domain over patents or other IP? This page seems to address the question, but doesn't give me a clear enough picture of the consequences for suppliers when government takes an "eminent domain" license... and it kind of leaves me thinking that if Intermec sues the goverment, and the patent isn't invalidated, taxpayers will be left holding the bag twice.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Saying "oh, it'll be a drop in the bucket for walmart because they're so big" is not terribly insightful- in fact, it's downright asinine.
Funny thing about licensing fees- they're often per-item, or based on the size(er, wealth) of the victim(er, licensee). It could very well cost Walmart hundreds of millions of dollars over a couple years...in which case, you can damn well bet they'll spend a [few] million to fight it.
Please help metamoderate.
should wait until RFID is in use everywhere up to and including imbedded under the skin of all citizens...
then, and only then is the time right to make the ultimate claim...
"All your rfid are belong to us"
think of the shareholder value...
This is the best news I've heard all day.
I can't believe it, here on Slashdot everyone (myself included) is applauding the predatory use of patents because for once it can help advance the common good.
Mark this day on your calandars, it's one to remember.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
DOS, OS/2, PC Jr.
One problem (Patents) cancels another problem (RFID). Everyone's happy.
If anyone is interested, here is a list of the Intermec's patents that contain the term "RFID". Posted anonymously to not seem to much like a karma whore. Enjoy.
A submarine patent is where you keep the patent in it's application phase, then at some later point, after being rejected several times and requesting re-examininations, adding specifics based on the current state of the market. Then you get to see how an industry shapes up, but you still get the benefit of the early patent applicaiton date.
Patents are good for 20 years from the date of applcation now, an attempt to keep submarine patents from getting too out of hand.
One other FYI, you generally only have about 6 years after you find out someone is infringing on your patent to begin litigation over the infringment. To just sit on it for more than 6 years exposes you to defenses of laches.
The use it or lose it doctrine in patent case law isn't as strict as it is in trademark law, but it still exists. If a patent holder learns of an infringement but delays legal action long enough to harm the alleged infringer, then the doctrine of laches bars the patent holder from collecting damages for the defendant's past infringements. Courts consider the facts of a case when figuring how long is "long enough to harm," but in general, "long enough to harm" won't be more than six years.
There have been RF devices that identify themselves using a unique code for a long time. An example would be a reader that security guards carry on their rounds. As they go on their route they read wall mounted tags. That way you can prove that the guards covered their route. For sure this predates 1997. Some of my students built one in that year.
My guess is that the patent is quite narrow (and therefore easy to get around) or it is unenforcable.
Must have pissed off the Wright brothers something fierce when their patents were rendered useless during that time
Useless? The fifth article of amendment to the Constitution for the united States of America provides that "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Weren't the Wrights rolling in dough from the royalties under such "just compensation"?
It just so happens that this one company's back-stabbing greed might just result in improved privacy.
Ironic, isn't it.
I doubt they have a patent covering the basic RFID technology. Chances are good that what they have are dozens of patents on how to use the technology - manufacturing techniques, various uses, perhaps some algorithms on more esoteric reader/tag interactions, etc.
Chances are good it'll have a chilling effect, but it won't hinder the industry at all. All that will happen is about $0.001 will go to this company for each tag, perhaps a few dollars for each reader, and the consumers will be left holding the bag.
The only real issue is all the lawyering that's going to have to go on to get the deals made - this is what's going to take time. If Walmart wants quick adoption, they'll either find a way around most of the patents, or they'll pay up. They won't try to discredit the patents - it'll be tied up for years, and the cost savings is still greater than the outlay.
-Adam
We have been using RFID at work for parts tracking in production since 1994. Would this be "Prior art"???
I had a meeting today with reps from NCR, who hope to be a big reseller/implementer of RFID solutions, and the salesman basically said that, yes, the first $50,000 you spend will be wasted.
The (economic) reason for this is that the technology is seriously underdeveloped and encumbered by IP claims just like this. But that's not stopping Walmart, Target, and a host of others from requiring manufacturers to participate in pilot programs to force manufacturers and retailers to implement the technology and work out the bugs. Walmart is requiring its top 10 vendors to ship all product to one of its DCs with RFID labels on cases and pallets this January; Target is requiring the same thing for selected vendors by July 2005.
So companies like my employer will have to spend $5-10,000/printer, and $0.50/label (on products we sell for $10), which is pure expense for us, for printers that will need to be replaced in a year to handle new standards, and labels that fail 20% of the time. Oh, and the fastest printing rate they've got is 2-4 inches/minute, which is half what we print at now.
The only way we can hope to recover these expenses (since retailers laugh at us when we say that we need to raise prices to cover expenses they're forcing us to incur) is to start transitioning our own inventory management system to RFID in order to improve efficiency and save money.
Was it this bad when Walmart forced the adoption of UPCs on everyone?
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
Yes, but this overlooks the real reason that Intermec is suing now: the desire to influence the standards process. You see, at the moment there are two competing standards candidates for the next generation of RFID chips. One comes from Intermec/Philips/TI, and the other from Matrics/Alien Technologies. The side that wins will profit hugely (many millions) because they'll have a faster time to market with their products. Big stuff.
I have no idea if Intermec plans to ride this lawsuit to the end, or if they're just using it as leverage to get their way in the standards process. It's possible that a graceful concession by the other side will see this thing go away, and Intermec graciously agree not to prosecute the suit. Or they may be in it for the long haul. Either way, they've decided to break out the big guns and they obviously think it will be worth it in the end.
Why didn't the RFID industry do a thorough patent search BEFORE they put so much effort into commercialising the technology? If the patent in question so obviously covers the majority of inventive steps involved in the RFID process then a search would have warned them of potential patent breach. If the patent is quite obscure and not directly relevant to the RFID process then applications should have been made on behalf of the indsutry group to cover this simply as a means to stop any one company from trying to claim ownership.
If only companies and such industries learned from such obvious mistakes made in the past then there wouldn't be all this whinging about how the patent system is broken. I am an inventor myself. I always do thorough patent searches before even contemplating filing. I know how difficult it is to get a great idea to commercialisation even if deep pockets are available. Because of this, I don't think it is fair to blame people that own the IP for wanting to get their dues when that invention makes it to market, whether it be by their own hand or not. Although, I do agree that the issue gets quite contentious when large companies, as opposed to the little guys, do this with submarine patents. But then again, the groups commercialising the tech should have done a thorough SEARCH!
ogglelog
This is not a case of using "submarine patent strategy". Submarining requires that the patentee drag out the process over several years by filing continuation after continuation. Then allowing the submarine to surface just before attempting litigation. Although the parent maybe published, it is hard for other inventors to know what is patented because new claims can be introduced in the children (which are unpublished) that automatically claim the priority of the parent patent.
c leview/979 /1/1/
l
Thus this is not a case of submarining because:
1) All continuations filed have been abandoned or published (granted) couple years ago.
2) All patents involved have been granted within the last 6 or so years. No way to hide any claims.
The patents invoved are listed in this RFID journal article.
http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/arti
And if you don't believe me you can always look up the status data here:
http://pair.uspto.gov/cgi-bin/final/home.p
My initial instincts says something is fishy, especially since EPC global members agree to certain terms on entering the group (offering reasonable licenses or technology royalty free to promote RFID.) Unfortunately, if you read both articles, you will see this has the potential to screw with the standards (especially UHF Gen 2) that EPC Global and its members have been working hard to come out with.
Whats even fishier is that Intermec has representatives on the EPC Global HAG. Hmm why does this sound familiar?
Basically, they're selling rights. You can't do X unless you pay us. Doesn't matter if you came up with it yourself or never even heard of them, you must pay or they'll sue. I really don't like the direction our fundamentally creative tech industry is headed.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
RFID is not automatically evil!
Tools can be used for bad or for good. RFID is a tool. It can be used for bad (privacy invasion) or good: EZ-pass, speedpass, streamlining warehouse/retail operation, and applications we haven't even thought of yet...
Am I the only one who is sick and tired of automatic rabid bitching anytime this technology is brought up?
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
I used Intermec's RFID products in a semiconductor company that's now long gone. It was pretty cool stuff, actually. They used the tags to track lots of wafers as they rode around the fab in process. Mobil gas stations in Southern California have this thing called "SpeedPass" which is essentially the same thing, but attached to your credit card info on the server. Yes, perhaps Intermec has a good case here, but the courts should take into account when companies sit idle while their IP is being "violated", to make some dough later on.
"Walton, 83, made about $3 million from patenting RFID technology. But his last royalty-bearing RFID patent expired in the mid-1990s, meaning that he won't share in the potentially gigantic windfall that will be generated as Wal-Mart and the Defense Department begin to require their largest suppliers to put RFID tags millions of warehoused goods."
In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and is widely considered as a bad move.
"Submarine Patents"? Keeping them secret?
It's the PATENT OFFICE's JOB to make sure, when a patent is filed, it's not a copy of another. Likewise, if you intend to try and make something, invent something, or use something as a standard, it's YOUR job to do the research and ensure that you're not infringing on someone's patents! Finally, you must ACTIVELY enforce your patent rights! RFID tags have been used for the last 20 years in manufacturing environments to monitor pallet movements, create build recipes, monitor what goods in the manufacturing line have what parts, have gone into repair bays, etc etc.
Still missing something. You need to make sure you dont actually have the patent, but have a patent which contains similar words (such as "the" or "and") and sue everyone who infringes the patent as well as the true patent holder. But never, ever show your patent to anyone.
Greed killed it. I hope!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.