Slashdot Mirror
802.11n May Never Happen Due to Patent Concerns
afabbro writes "The Register is reporting that the 802.11n standard is imperiled because the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organization has refused to submit a Letter of Assurance, promising not to sue those who implement the standard. '...the realization that CSIRO holds essential patents, and has failed to provide a Letter of Assurance as required by the IEEE, could prevent the standard ever being finalized ... 802.11n promises to deliver a fivefold increase in speed, and double the range of 802.11g. Indeed in many cases it's already delivering something approximating that, as pre-standard kit has been available for almost a year. In May the Wi-Fi Alliance got so bored waiting for the IEEE to complete the standard that they started certifying kit as conforming to the draft, even though the final version isn't expected until 2008."
Wait, you mean they've been lying to me all along? So much for patents promoting progress!
As far as the CSIRO is concerned it has never been any different under Labour.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Err no that's New Zealand. :-)
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
The CSIRO I dare say want to make sure they don't lose the rights to the technology they developed and I dont blame them. Many large companies have already made it clear they will do anything to (even if its illegal) strip the CSIRO of its patent right to technologies that are part of WiFi because they want a "free ride". The real issue here is not the CSIRO but the companies trying to leverage the technology out of their hands. Im not surprised in the least that this loggerhead has been created by the "we dont want to pay for patents even though we force everyone else to do the same" multinationals.
CSIRO is a government body and even if companies start paying royalties CSIRO will see very little of it since it will go into consolidated revenue which hopefully will go to bribing (damn I cant find the ^H key) the voter with tax breaks.
Australia (read Government of the day) has for many years believed in what is called the "level playing field" the problem was Australia was always at the bottom, now the "shoe is on the other foot" the Government is a little confused especially since they should be pushing for royalties. It must be noted that CSIRO does not set royalties that is up to the Australian Government.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Time and time again we hear that patents are an economic necessity. People and organizations won't invest in new technologies if they can't exploit them for a profit later on, and all that. But we rarely hear economists and businesspeople talk about the economic loss that patents bring.
This is just one example. Now the public may very well be deprived of this new technology just because of these patent concerns. So in a very resource-wasteful move, we may very well need to derive another technology that duplicates 802.11n, not for any technical reason, but just to satisfy the legal conditions of a mere document. That's clearly harmful for the economy as a whole. Those resources could have been put towards developing new technologies, rather than reimplementing what already existed.
"In May the Wi-Fi Alliance got so bored waiting for the IEEE to complete the standard"
I know it's harder to figure out anthromorphism doesn't apply to organisations, since they're made out of people, but can you honestly imagine the following in the documents: "Today we voted to start delivering draft-based wifi kits, because we were bored".
If you'll look for reasons, look for logistics, money, deadlines and contracts.
.. lets choose a different standard then and let them live in their own island :)
http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
This is probably just a way for CSIRO to saying they don't hear enough ching in the bling.
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
CSIRO owns patents on pretty much all common wireless technology deployed today. It owns these patents because it developed the technologies. Currently CSIRO is actively trying to get other companies to actually honor its legitimate patents not just for "n" but the existing 802.11x standards as well.
These are real patents that lay the mathematical/technological foundation for how pretty much all wireless networking works currently. Saying that CSIRO has no right to defend these patents would be like saying CISCO is morally obliged to give away all their routers because we all depend on the internet and we need routers for the internet to work.
Maybe. There is an old meme over here about clever research work which only gets commercialised when it leaves the country. The classic example is the black box flight recorder which was invented in Australia, but never earned much money for this country.
Because we are a small country we do tend to hold on to assets like this a little bit tighter. Or try to, anyway.
As far as living here goes, I know a few people from the USA who have migrated to Australia. They seem happy with the environment, but they lose a lot in the transition. It can be hard to buy a good house in Australia now if you sell up in the US and bring your money with you.
It is hard for me to give a better comparison than that, because I have only ever lived in one country.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
So no, they don't realise this fact, because the Australian public don't seem to care, or those that do are scared of politics.
We at slashdot are scientists, specialists and kernel hackers. Your FUD will be found out.
So is this yet another example of using patents to retard the "progress of science and the useful arts"?
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
"Try to" being the operative phrase.
CSIRO filed the patent on OFDM in 1992, and informed IEEE in 1997 that the method was patented and would attract royalties. American businesses including Lucent, Cisco and HP have ignored CSIRO's request for companies using the technology (which took 8 years to develop) to license IP rights.
Hypocrisy runs deep in big business.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Because we are a small country we do tend to hold on to assets like this a little bit tighter. Or try to, anyway.
I think this is part of the problem, however the greater problem is that there are companies out there who are already violating patents by producing 802.11g equipment covered by CSIRO patents that STILL do not pay royalties. There was a big deal about this a while ago. Sadly, American companies seem to love to want to overlook this while screaming if somebody overseas violates their patent.
I believe that the people who make gear based on 802.11g & 802.11n should at least be honourable enough to give royalties to the people that invented the technology to enable their products (leading to their income) to exist should get something in return. That's the whole idea of patents, correct?
To boil this down, CSIRO invented the schemes to make 802.11n work. Companies want to use this technology to make money, but don't want to share any of it with the inventor. This sounds like perfect use of the patent system.
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
As an American whose tax dollars fund (D)ARPA, I demand payback from all other nations using the Internet. Also, I think the good citizens of California whose tax dollars helped fund BSD would like some too.
Patents exist to pay the fixed cost of invention by granting a temporary monopoly. The other option to cover the fixed cost is subsidy. Publicly funded research organizations like the CSIRO work based on the subsidy method. The cost is paid by the public, so the public should have use of the invention. The only question here is whether Australia is going to act like other nations where public means WORLD (considering the actions of ARPA, UC Berkeley, and INRIA), or whether they're going to be dicks.