Slashdot Mirror
Australian WiFi Inventors Win US Legal Battle
First time accepted submitter Kangburra writes "Australian government science body CSIRO said Sunday it had won a multi-million-dollar legal settlement in the United States to license its patented technology that underpins the WiFi platform worldwide. Scientists from the agency invented the wireless local area network (WLAN) technology that is the basis of the WiFi signal employed by computers, smartphones and other Internet-ready devices around the world."
What's next? Crocodile Dundee doing a commercial for CSIRO saying "That's not a wireless router. THAT'S a wireless router."
This is a major cause for celebration.
Remember folks, this is a RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, these funds will be mostly plowed back into further research.
Also it makes for a good case-in-point, it doesn't matter WHO did the work or WHERE their funding comes from, a valid patent is a valid patent.
The CSIRO isn't your typical patent troll. They do serious R&D on all sorts of things: environment, solar, agriculture, minerals, you name it. They're very well respected in Australia for the research they do.
The money from this win will go towards funding more research. These are the good guys; if they have a patent for something, it will be more than your typical "XOR for a visible cursor that doesn't interfere with the display" job.
I have no knowledge of what is patented by this company but wouldn't you want to stop the patent infringement when other companies are using it? Why did they wait for it to be adapted and ingrained within our society for so long.
It's sad to see how much effort they had to go through. This case is EXACTLY what patents are for: a bunch of scientists did some research and patented the results - companies took their results and made commercial products out of that and believed they could get away with not paying any kind of royalty or license fee.
The vast majority of this money will go back into further research, slowly making the world a better place.
For those who care to know (PDF): Their Most Recent Annual Report.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
Can we get future standards that *DON'T* have a troll waiting to collect $$$? I thought any standard promoted by IEEE and like organizations had to be patent free. Wouldn't that be the best solution for everybody?
o/` o/` This was a triumph ... o/` o/`
Wifi? That's nothing!. For REAL world-changing Aussie IT, look no further than Product Activation! ,
which won a massive $388 million payout (Mostly from from Microsoft). And then lost. And then won again, and then lost again, and then a sorta 25% win or something..
I mean, come on!. Imagine life WITHOUT product activation. Microsoft products just wouldn't "feel" the same. It's the core technology of their whole solution!
Theiving australians are at it again!
Its already 2nd April in Australia
taxpayers pay for this government research, everyone who pays taxes pays for it. why isn't it free then?
The bottom line in all of this is that you're WiFi devices are now a bit more expensive than before. Would be nicer to have worldwide standards that aren't patent encumbered.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
What is there something different about Australian Wi-Fi? Why doesn't the headline say, "WiFi inventors win US legal battle"?
Maybe it's like Canadian football vs American football, where it's almost exactly the same except for some subtle differences that you wouldn't notice unless you were really paying attention.
So what is it? Are these the guys that invented WiFi or did they invent Australian WiFi? Please don't make me read the article. I'm already past due for my Sunday afternoon nap.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I didn't laugh.
25 years later, your first thought about Australia is still Crocodile Dundee? Kinda offensive. Next time there's a story on an American patent owner, should my first post say "What's next? Uncle Sam going to whistle Yankee Doodle Dandy while eating a Big Mac?"
belong to Oz :)
That's kinda our three most recognizable cultural exports. I recognize that Crocodile Dundee is kinda silly, but that Kangaroos and Fosters are about all most people see of Australia. Some of us have heard of Vegemite. Your culture (Pop or otherwise) hasn't made it that far. Sorry mate.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This is NOT a cause for celebration. CSIRO's patent does not claim that they invented WiFi. They did not. Their claimis related to the OFDM modulation used in 802.11g and 802.11a. They don't actually claim they invented OFDM, since OFDM was used since the 60's in other networks. They also didn't help Wi-Fi adopt OFDM -- indeed, they took no part whatsoever in the development of the Wi-Fi standards. Their only claim to fame is that they had before anyone else patented the idea that OFDM could be used in-doors, by a wireless system inside a home. Frankly, that should rate a big "duh, nothing to see, obvious." But they were the first to patent, and the legal system being what it is, they can now claim royalties on the standard. Like any other troll.
everybody seems absolutely sure that CSIRO deserves to win and are "the good guys" but I have yet to see a precise, _technical_ explanation of what was patented.
They may deserve to win, but I remain unconvinced given the incredible amount of tripe that gets awarded a patent these days.
But at least in most of this world, governments have no laws prohibiting them to own patents. However, there are some treaties like in the EU, where local governments aren't allowed to make a profit out of any commercial activity, without paying taxes over said profit. This is merely to insure a level playing field where commercial companies get fair competition. In summary, there is no real reason why governments shouldn't own patents, just as long as it's not unfair competition to commercial entities.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
What do the treaties between NZ and the USA say about this? It was a summary judgement, since the American company failed to defend itself entirely, but it just might be enough reason for a US judge to allow confiscation of all assets of the company that ignored the patent.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
DARPA is the equivalent to CSIRO in the US. Just think how pissed off everyone would be if this story went the other direction...
Catalyst did a story on this just recently. http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2708730.htm. This would be an interesting watch for anyone that has an interest in wireless technologies. It explains what the patent is, how it was conceived and the effort it took for them to gain credit for their work.
In Australian WiFi the the radio waves go clockwise.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
25 years later, your first thought about Australia is still Crocodile Dundee? Kinda offensive. Next time there's a story on an American patent owner, should my first post say "What's next? Uncle Sam going to whistle Yankee Doodle Dandy while eating a Big Mac?"
Except that we wouldn't be offended by that... we purposefully created all of those stereotypes ourselves. We are PR masters.
The most major media to distribute out of Australia remains to be Crocodile this and Crocodile that, whether it's a movie or an Australian guy dangling his kid over a croc's mouth.
Sounds like AU needs a better PR rep. Want to hire one of ours from Hollywood?
I8-D
IANAL, however, the litigants SETTLED their dispute. The defendent sets a presedent for the prosecution to persue other parties by recognizing the validity of a patent. That does not mean that the patent has been valided by a court of law.
The court may have found that frequency-division-multiplexing already existed, bit transmission already existed, and Marconi had patented Tesla's radio a while back. Perhaps they would have found that playing a different song over the radio does not constitute a new invention. Perhaps the court would have upheld the patent. We will never know because the defendent decided that it was cheaper to settle than fight.
Defendents that roll over and play dead are rewarding patent trolls. Whether CSIRO is a troll or not is irrelevant. A million+ lawyers in the United States have taken notice and will continue the abomination of the patent process. Pray that they do not come to your country.
If you go read the patent, (US patent number 5,487,069), it appears that what they invented was an amalgamation of Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplex modulation, combined with a healthy dose of forward error correction, and a HUGE dollop of "in this case, and in that case, and in a score of other possible cases", such that one way or another, you're caught in the net. IMHO this is a well-written patent that would be quite difficult to avoid.
OFDM was quite the rage in the early 90's when this patent was filed. CSIRO's good fortune was that they happened to be working in an application area which saw phenomenal success (in monetary terms), and they got their patent application filed "just in time" (11/93) to be ahead of the pack. OFDM is the basis for 802.11a and 802.11g. It's probably also used in 802.11n, but I'm less familiar with that variant.
Also, FYI, OFDM is the basis for both WiMax and LTE.
The patent appears to cover a particular implementation of orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM). OFDM was invented at Bell Labs in the U.S. in the 1960s and 70s. I believe that Thompson in France figured out how to add forward error correction codes.
This validity of this patent has been widely challenged on the grounds that it covers an obvious invention. A nearly identical CSIRO patent was invalidated in Japan. The U.S. patent in question was close to being invalidated before a settlement was reached.