Slashdot Mirror
New Patent Suit Threatens Bluetooth Standard
Aditi.Tuteja writes "A U.S. research institute has sued Nokia, Samsung Electronics and Matsushita-owned Panasonic for violating a patent on Bluetooth technology, potentially putting the free wireless standard at risk. The Washington Research Foundation, which markets technology from the University of Washington, is seeking damages from the three mobile-phone makers for using a radio frequency receiver technology without paying royalties. From the article: 'According to the lawsuit, Bluetooth-based computers, cell phones and headsets made by the companies have violated four patents for research done in the mid-1990s by Edwin Suominen when he was a student at the University of Washington. All four patents are now licensed by the Washington Research Foundation. The foundation's lead counsel on the case, Steven Lisa, said the court filing followed two years of informal attempts to resolve the issue with the major players in the industry.'"
you can also read about it here!
I was under the impression that Bluetooth was an open standard, and it looks like the suits involve specific chipsets used by the companies in question, not the standard as a whole.
Hello!
I am new to this Slashdot thing. I have trouble understanding this... Wasn't this story posted before? It's like the same story posted twice.What's the word for it? Doop?
We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us
That's impossible. We're already six days into the year. There's no way slashdot could go six days without a dupe.
... and then they built the supercollider.
An interesting thing to note here... The Bluetooth standard was developed by Ericsson, the swedish company that manufactures mobile phones and phone switching systems. They also have the most complete and reliable Bluetooth implementation in their phones. However, they are NOT listed as one of the companies being sued.
War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
I have to admit that I am not a Bluetooth Expert, but I do have a degree in Electrical Engineering.
With embedded devices (especially low-power ones, like bluetooth headsets),
the trick is in making the hardware comply with the protocol,
but the art is doing so with as little (electrical) effort as possible.
If he can design a chip that takes care of the entire Bluetooth side of things,
which consumes only a fraction of what a microcontroller does,
that chip design saves engeineers of embedded devices a lot of effort.
They are, however, expected to pay for the use of his design.
This form of outsourced development is what makes the patent-world tick.
Actually accomplishing the same, without infringeing on those patents, is one of the things makes the F/OSS world tick.
My guess is, that he probably came in contact with the early Bluetooth ideas and tinkered with those in his spare time in College.
This, of itself, means that the implementations he designed in college are owned by said college, which applied for a patent and got lucky
"I was in love with a beautiful blonde once, dear. She drove me to drink. It's the one thing I am indebted to her for."
The earliest of Mr Suominen's patents assigner to the University of Washington was filed in 1996, but wasn't granted until 1999. Of the four of Mr Suominen's patents assigned to the University of Washington, only one was filed before the formation of the Bluetooth consortium, and none of them were issued until after. It is entirely possible that Ericsson (or one of the other original Bluetooth founders) would have IP that predates the 1998 formation of the consortium.
The fact that the filing is only against three handset manufacturers, all of which have Bluetooth chipsets manufactured by CSR PLC in the UK, shows that this isn't an attack on Bluetooth, just one method of its implementation. Oddly enough, the lawsuit is going after the handset manufacturers and not the chipmaker. This just shows that they are only after money, and to rustle up some FUD regarding non-Broadcom chipsets. This is reinforced comments from Rob Enderle (whose previous clients include Microsoft and SCO): "Defendants would be quick to settle if it appeared the case was immediately threatening their product lines".
Undoubtedly, the defense would most likely claim Laches against any possible injunction. It is also highly likely that other memebers of the Bluetooth consortium would leverage their IP to prove prior art. It seems Washington Research Foundation and Mr Suominen have quite a large uphill battle in their hands.
I don't think this case will last very long, and even if they were successful, I'm sure Nokia, Samsung and Panasonic would just move to a different chipset in the future.