Slashdot Mirror
Cisco Patents the Triple Play
Aditi.Tuteja writes, "Cisco was recently granted a patent on a 'system and method for providing integrated voice, video and data to customer premises over a single network.' Sound a lot like 'triple play?' Yes it is. The patent, which was filed back in 2000, describes a system that would allow consumers to receive all of their home services through one service provider instead of two or three. The patent's wording seems broad enough to cover nearly all existing implementations of triple play, and some are worried that Cisco will try to wield the newly granted patent against such providers as AT&T and Comcast. If such a thing were to happen, progress on AT&T's Project Lightspeed could slow even more."
Will Cisco try to use the patent to stymie AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, etc.
What Cisco will do is force them to pay an arm and a leg in licensing costs, because Cisco rightly figured out (in advance) that the 'triple play' is where things are heading.
Cisco deserves a retroactive +1 Insightful mod
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
The reason Cisco is patenting this is because they now own Scientific-Atlanta, who are one of a few companies that provide the infrastructure that make it possible for Time Warner, Comcast, et. al. to offer "triple play" or "all in one" or whatever brand name your particular cable operator uses for the combination. If Cisco were to sue someone for using this, it wouldn't be the cable operators - it'd be Motorola or whomever, their competitors who also offer a similar infrastructure.
I'm not exactly sure why the author of the article thinks that they'd sue the cable operators, many of whom use the Scientific-Atlanta technology in question... perhaps he wasn't aware of the link between Cisco and Sci-Atl.. which leads me to question his authority to even speak on the topic in the first place.
I call dibbs on creating a patent for opening 4 simultaneous TCP/IP sockets!
So quick, gimme 10$
The Raven
Think about it: Cisco going after their biggest customers-- Verizon, AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, TW/Brighthouse?
Nope. Not going to happen. And therefore, despite the fact that this patent needs to be thrown out on its ass, it's useless to even have the first tiny tort sent. It's a nihilistic sort of patent to start with....
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
What the fuck is triple-play?
Cue The Sun...
The absurdity of this patent is mind boggling. All a network does is move data. Voice and video may be encoded as data, but this has absolutely nothing to do with the network.
Why don't I just patent moving web pages over networks. Or, moving mp3s over networks. (Now there's an idea for the RIAA...) Just how obvious does something need to be for the folks at the patent office? Moving DATA over a NETWORK? How novel...
This just goes to show that everything should be encrypted. Only then can fairness, and the end-end nature of the Internet be restored. As soon as the ISP's can peek at your data, you may as well bend over.
I just patented a scheme whereby a company abusively patents anything it can possibly think of in order to squeeze money out of nothing! Pay up, Cisco!
They offer $90.00 a month for 10mbps DSL, VOIP phone and HD/Digital cable.
Sweet deal, but here in SF they seem to be quite spotty as to what buildings have it.. to the point of being a joke.
But I'm just bitter because the building across the street has it and my lofts I live in doesn't.
Instead I have Earthlink DSL which gives me 8mbps and VOIP phone for $70.
So I guess 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
This sounds to me like a patent Cisco would use as leverage, not for direct revenue. (insert company here) could be swayed to buy products or license other patents from Cisco, to avoid being called on the carpet with respect to their 'triple-play' offerings. Maybe now we'll see (if we don't already) telcos and cable ISPs using Cisco hardware exclusively (paid for by the customer, of course, but mandated by the ISP at Cisco's behest)..that would be a huge financial win for Cisco, and would probably be the path of least resistance for the ISPs.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
I prefer to call it "Ménage à trois". :)
I believe its ok to have a patent on an idea, only if the language is specific to the actual item, to the minute detail. Language such as "standard protocol, such as TCP/IP" is not. Thats similar to having a patent on popping popcorn using heat.
Isn't this exactly was promised by ISDN in the early 1980's? Somehow, it never got past step #1, ie. 2B+D. The plan was, once it caught on, things would scale up as the end user was able to consume bandwidth. 95B+D anybody? Oh, never mind, AT&T's patents for ISDN have probably all expired. If we take the same idea, and color it pink, the PTO will gladly patent it for us.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
I for one welcome our new triple play overlords
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
I'm going to patent the process of providing voice, video, data, and scents. Bingo!, I trump your patent.
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
Indeed, a warning to us all.
If you read the actual patent, you would see that it is a patent on a specific implementation of using dynamic access lists at upstream routers to block multicast content from particular subscribers or subnetworks.
It is not a business process patent. It is not a patent on triple play, though it clearly covers one particular implementation of triple play using multicast and upstream filtering. But there are plenty of other ways to skin this cat.
-b
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
- service provider
hosting these services. That's what Cisco's patent is for.Instead of 3 concurrent streams, what about a single datastream.
We call that the network layer.
Converter box or software separates the single datastream back into the 3 (or more) original feeds.
And that would be the transport layer.
You'll realize there's a problem when they pass the cost onto you, the consumer.
AIM, Yahoo, and MSN offred this *WAY* before the patent in question. Cisco is a bunch of fucking fools for even trying to follow up with this, as I've been doing this since 1998. Two years too fucking late, boys. You got a problem with it, then deal with this expert witness in court, who has no shame in shutting you down for your ignorance and greed. Dunno about the rest of the /. crowd, but I won't stand for this one.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Cisco already has the highest markup in the business, to the envy of everyone else.
Overheard in a pricing discussion on a new router at Cisco:
Mgr. of marketing: "Well, the overall manufacturing costs of this box is $3250. What should we sell it for?. 10x or $32,500 as usual?"
V.P: "Well, that number looks a little constructed. Let's say $36,847"
All: "Done"
This patent will allow them to keep it that way.
If you work for a company like Dell, or Gateway, start to cry now, or maybe look for a new job...
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
I worked for Kingston Interactive Television which was the first commercial launch of an Interactive Digital Television over ADSL in October 1999.
KIT offered the three services that are now called Triple play, Telephone, Video (both VOD and broadcast) and data (Internet and Walled Garden content).
Kingston Interactive Television October 1999.