Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Firms Take on Australia's CSIRO Over Patents

dingram17 writes "ABC News is reporting that six U.S. computer companies (Apple, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Microsoft and Netgear) are taking legal action to try to break a U.S. patent that the CSIRO holds on wireless networking. The CSIRO has patents on OFDM technology, as used in 802.11a and 802.11g. It has been alleged that the CSIRO demands $4 per chipset for the use of this technology. It appears that the patent in question is U.S. Patent 5,487,069 'Wireless LAN.' From a quick look, this appears to be a wide ranging patent."

16 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. Wow.... by the_macman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Simply stunning. So a company actually holds a legal patent to a technology they invented and since the big boys (Dell, Apple, etc) don't want to pay the royalties they try to legally "break" the patent. Does anyone else see something wrong with this? I hardly see these companies as the victim.

    1. Re:Wow.... by kavau · · Score: 4, Insightful
      A government entity should never be allowed to patent its own tech, that tech was paid for by the people and should be available freely to all in every scenario I can possibly think of.

      In this case, the research was paid for by Australian taxpayers. So why should American companies be able to freeload on the technology?

    2. Re:Wow.... by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Americans didn't invent rocket propulsion, the English did. Americans didn't invent the jet engine, the Germans did. Americans didn't invent the computer, the English did. Americans didn't invent the war, the Germans did. Americans didn't invent the freedom, the French did.
      So what was this major thing they invented? (btw, I am sure you meant last century)

    3. Re:Wow.... by shitdrummer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I feel obligated to point out that if the government didn't get involved at all it would save even more money in taxes

      Then all the IP would be owned by large multi-national corporations that would take the profits out of Australia and their R&D dollars as well.

      How many multi-nationals do you think would give a shit about Australia's unique problems, such as the Cane Toad? http://www.csiro.au/index.asp?type=faq&id=CaneToad Control

      Shitdrummer

    4. Re:Wow.... by mjsottile77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I (as an American) don't see the problem with this. If I pay taxes, and they get invested in research, I'd be quite happy if the proceeds of that research get reinvested BACK into research to either augment the amount I pay, or reduce the amount of burden on me as a taxpayer. I don't care if it's not America that is the one profiting -- why should we always feel we should be top dog? If Australia paid for and has the patent rights to it, then good for them - and if they reinvest it into research, then maybe we'll see something else good pop out of the labs down under.

  2. Go aussie go.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope the CSIRO wins considereing the way we get stuffed over by US companies out here.

  3. Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember, people: Patents are only good when they put money in YOUR pocket.

  4. Turnabout is fair play... by Sensible+Clod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After all the patents U.S. companies have been taking out for this exact purpose, I say, let the Aussies bash 'em once!

    At any rate, I've given up hope that the patent system will actually be fixed...

    --

    The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me
  5. You don't like patents now? by AdamTheBastard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why won't these companies make up their minds? Do they like protecting IP with patents or not? It looks as though the only important IP is their IP.

    Microsoft has been using patents for years to squash oposition, now they are sick and tired of $4 per chip? That must be breaking their bank!

  6. Intellectual property by uq1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From a previous slashdot article, http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/14/07 2201&tid=109&tid=141&tid=155&tid=1

    How hypocritical are Microsoft appearing?

    On one hand they're trying to teach kids flawed views on intellectual property to ensure that future generations won't pirate as much, and on the other hand they're doing exactly what they're trying to prevent, the theft of intellectual property.

    Such sad, sad, little people.

  7. "Free Trade" my arse by Kris_J · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The Australian government, my government, needs to get a clue about the behaviour of the US and US corporations. This is exactly the sort of crap it signed on for when it forced through the "Free Trade" agreement. Frankly, I think we should cut off all formal ties and agreements with the US and have a real free trade environment. At the very least, Australia needs to recognise that the US patent system is irretreavably corrupt and should not be honoured in Australia.

    If the US would then similarly like to not honour Australian patents, they're welcome -- given that's what they appear to want anyway.

  8. Live by the sword, die by the sword by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...although the companies in question certainly won't die if they have to pay royalties here.

    If the companies in question want to reap the benefits of the patent system, they have to pay the price of the patent system. But since most three-year-old children show greater maturity than most of these corporations, it's no surprise that these corporations want to reap the benefits without paying the price.

    They're just lucky that the organization in question (the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, a research arm of the Australian government) isn't a competitor. Although I suppose in this case it could use this patent to give Australian companies an advantage over their American competition.

    It's about damned time the U.S. corporations got a black eye from the bullshit patent situation over here. After all, they're the ones who have been abusing it. I just wish it happened far more often.

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  9. They're actually screwing with the AU government by anti-NAT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    CSIRO is a not-for-profit Australian Government organisation. Do all these companies really want to screw around with what is likely to be their biggest customer in Australia ?

    Invalidate the patent by all means if it shouldn't have been granted. However, if it is legitimate, then just pay the licensing fees.

    Remember, a patent is a government granted monopoly for a time period to allow the patent holder to both recoup their costs and to make a profit out of inventing the idea that has been patented. If these companies don't like that, then they should have all their patents revoked immediately, or they should sue the US government for incopetence because the US government granted the patent in the first place.

    --
    The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
  10. Re:Using patents offensively is JUST WRONG by rat_herder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The current patent system seems to be falling apart, and needs urgent changes... but to say 'no single entity should be able to monopolize an idea' is silly. If there is no incentive to invest in a new ideas, those that need capital to develop may never come into existence. This is perfectly illustrated in the case of CSIRO. They have not bought the IP in order to sue people, they actually invested the money into the research. Now they have a right to profit from the idea.

  11. Re:As an Aussie by cranos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry, we didn't grow up in a culture that says everyone has the right to bear heavy calibre machine guns.

    On the snide remark regarding australias armed forces, lets just remember that in the latest american adventure, it was australian special forces doing a lot of the ground work before the invasion even started. You guys couldn't even stop the looters from robbing the local banks

  12. Poetic justice by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the reason why people became "pro-patent in this case" is that the CSIRO actually use patents the way they were intended to be used. They invent something, then re-invest the money back into current research. They have been quietly doing this under various names since 1916 and have a very impressive record of practical innovation and basic research.

    "...the ideas there such as OFDM and FEC, etc. are actually not all that ingenious." - CSIRO developed and patented the idea a decade ago, hindsight is always 20/20. As you say, anyone with a "deep understanding" could have thought of the idea but the fact remains that nobody did.

    "I oppose anyone who wants to use them offensively" - The corporations that are now whinning about paying $4 per chip are the same ones that pushed hard for US IP laws to be adopted under the recently signed free trade agreement. To me, (an Aussie), it is poetic justice when a "non-profit" can screw a cartel of the largest "for-profits" with thier own rules. Before the 1980's corporations used to buy CSIRO patents for a pitance and the Australian public would watch as Agri-corps and Drug-pushing-corps turned govt funded research into a private cash cow. The use of licenses to make "for-profits" pay for basic research is one of CSIRO's greatest innovations.

    Some examples of IP idiocy in Australia, patent for the wheel, Ugg boots.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.