CSIRO Wins Wi-Fi Settlement From HP 125
suolumark writes "The CSIRO has won what could be a landmark settlement from Hewlett Packard over the use of patented wireless technology. The settlement ended HP's involvement in a four-year lawsuit brought by the CSIRO on a group of technology companies, in which the organisation was seeking royalties for wi-fi technology that is used extensively on laptops and computers worldwide. CSIRO spokesman Luw Morgan earlier said legal action was continuing against 13 companies: Intel, Dell, Toshiba, Asus, Netgear, D-Link, Belkin, SMC, Accton, 3-Com, Buffalo, Microsoft and Nintendo."
Suing the wrong people (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What we need (Score:5, Interesting)
They are not 'raising money via lawsuits'. The way you say that makes it sound like it was part of their business model. That is completely false.
Other companies *agreed to pay* royalties to license the technology when the standard was being ratified.
Then, the other companies basically said: "agreed to pay? agreed to pay what? what is this agreed to pay you are referring to? I don't see anyone named 'agreed to pay' around here, perhaps you are lost?"
The companies took the tech and didn't pay anything, in blatant violation of the terms of the agreement, and are now being sued as the CSIRO's last recourse.
The CSIRO has been negotiating with these companies for YEARS trying to get the royalties to which they are entitled. The companies were given ample time to come good without getting the courts involved.
Apparently though, American companies only feel as though they should pay royalties for IP from other American companies, and everyone else can get stuffed.
Well, who's stuffed now?
I dislike the patent system as much as anyone, but this is an organisation who is using it in an honest fashion, for its intended purpose - to encourage innovation and actually develop useful products with their patents. Other companies tried to take the technology and not pay anything, and are now being forced to pay up.
This is one case where the patent system truly is working as it should.
Re:Packet Radio (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:If the Shoe fits ... (Score:2, Interesting)
So apparently the fault here can be shared: CSIRO hasn't been playing ball with the normal IEEE standardisation process.
Having said that, it still seems pretty risky for the named companies to implement the standard, knowing that they weren't immune from patent suits.
The Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on the standard notes that the validity of the patent itself is a bit uncertain.
Frankly this is just a bit ridiculous. This standard has been under development since 2004, and it hasn't been ratified yet, and isn't expected to be for another year (at least?). We should have moved on to the next new thing by now.
Re:What we need (Score:3, Interesting)
I thought the modus operandi of a patent troll was to go after the little fish who either didnt have the money to defend themselves so settled out of court, or who tried to defend themselves and lost so setting s precedent with which to go after the big fish with.
Looks like the CSIRO thought they had a strong case and went after the big boys straight off and the courts agreed with them. I'm sure HP threw everything they had at them, which your garden variety patent troll wouldn't survive.