Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intermec Claims RFID is Proprietary

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the bought-the-right dept.

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?"

11 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. They're using... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    the evil of patents for good. Hmm, I think my head might explode.

    1. Re:They're using... by Psymunn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Wait, if RFID chips are being put in money, and they are patented...
      can intermec claim they deserve royalties on money?!?

      --
      The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
    2. Re:They're using... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A minature transponder, nothing unique about pinhead size electronics, without a battery (done before), that transmits a number, big deal, and a receiver that picks up that number, and treats it like a barcode (very old hat), that works unreliably in the real world, and wont work on tin cans / coke cans or most metalic consumer goods.

      On a pallet of goods, the ones in the centre wont be picked up, think of salmon tins secreted between dog food tins, short of exposing the shopper and trolley to secret and harmful doses of ionising radiation, which works well in the next generation of X-ray rfid chips.

  2. No No No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!

    1. Re:No No No... by ICA · · Score: 5, Informative

      Okay, first of all I am biased, because I work for Intermec (in wireless LANs, not RFID though).

      Disclaimer aside, you're exactly right, this is not meant to be a submarine patent. We have put a lot of time and money into R&D and want to protect that investment. However, we did not wait until it was late and adopted, and then create some rediculous premise for suing the pants off everybody.

      The strategy the company is trying to take is that of fair licensing to all who wish to use the technology.

      I know the Slashdot crowd will likely rake me over the coals for stating all of this, saying we are just evil and greedy. However, we are a R&D-driven company, and it helps pay my paycheck.

  3. They're using...A small blow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    " Hmm, I think my head might explode."

    Sorry. I have a patent on that. Pay up, then blow up.

  4. 2 wrongs? by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!
  5. Intermec's RFID patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  6. This isn't wht a submarine patent is. by sharkb8 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  7. Re:IBM was this stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As someone pointed out, IBM is no stranger to 'being stupid.' However, without knowing the sums involved, this sale seems to have worked out well for them -- they got some revenue, and avoided hanging on to a conflict of interest themselves.

    Given their Linux strategy (which admittedly wasn't very thought-out in 1997, so this was probably just serendipity), and the fallout from the holocaust revelations, hanging on to an RFID card would've made the company's image uncomfortably 'evil.' Plus, IBM is simply too big to easily swing a patent like this -- people know how to do patent searches, and if there were even a chance IBM would try to collect revenue on it, a new consortium would've appeared to push a freer standard. Like Microsoft, they're often stuck filing more for their own protection than for actual profit. The smaller fish, in turn, *can* slip under the "sonar," so they're going to try to extract value from it IBM couldn't have leveraged, and hopefully paid well enough for the privilege.

    Ironically, I'm typing this on an IBM M-Pro from around 1998 or so, which includes a RFID 'asset tag' in its construction. Thankfully, the BIOS does allow disabling it; it was more to ease the 'Where's the machine on this pallet supposed to go?/What's this machine have in it, and who spilled coffee in the CD-ROM before we gave it to Bob?' questions than to actively prevent or track theft.

  8. What this is definately NOT by DeICQLady · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    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/artic leview/979 /1/1/

    And if you don't believe me you can always look up the status data here:
    http://pair.uspto.gov/cgi-bin/final/home.pl

    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?