ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Harm to standards and compatibility"

m (Reverted edits by 193.52.39.202 (talk) to last revision by Ciaran)
(Related pages on {{SITENAME}}: * Patenting data formats)
(11 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{navbox}}
 
 
Patents harm standards and compatibility by blocking the inclusion of necessary or important functionality.
 
Patents harm standards and compatibility by blocking the inclusion of necessary or important functionality.
  
Line 20: Line 19:
 
* [[GSM]]
 
* [[GSM]]
 
* [[G.729, G.722, and G.723.1]]
 
* [[G.729, G.722, and G.723.1]]
 +
* [[VRRP]]
 +
 +
==Possible defence against non-disclosed patents==
 +
 +
From Wikipedia:<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264#Patent_licensing</ref>
 +
 +
<blockquote>
 +
In 2005, Qualcomm, which was the assignee of US5,452,104 and US5,576,767, sued Broadcom in US District Court, alleging that Broadcom infringed the two patents by making products that were compliant with the H.264 video compression standard.<ref name="case">See [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/fed/071545p.pdf Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp.], No. 2007-1545, 2008-1162 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 1, 2008). For articles in the popular press, see signonsandiego.com, [http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070127-9999-1b27verdict.html "Qualcomm loses its patent-rights case"] and [http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070126-9999-1b26qualcomm.html "Qualcomm's patent case goes to jury"]; and bloomberg.com [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601204&sid=aLX_DFMCEYWU&refer=technology "Broadcom Wins First Trial in Qualcomm Patent Dispute"]</ref>  In 2007, the District Court found that the patents were unenforceable because Qualcomm had failed to disclose them to the JVT prior to the release of the H.264 standard in May 2003.<ref name="case" /> In December 2008, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's order that the patents be unenforceable but remanded to the District Court with instructions to limit the scope of unenforceability to H.264 compliant products.<ref name="case" />
 +
</blockquote>
 +
 +
{{help|Need to rewrite the paragraph from Wikipedia to fit {{SITENAME}}.}}
  
 
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
 
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
Line 29: Line 39:
 
* [[Patent ambush]] (also discusses submarine patents)
 
* [[Patent ambush]] (also discusses submarine patents)
 
* [[Inequality between small and large patent holders‎]]
 
* [[Inequality between small and large patent holders‎]]
 +
* [[FRAND]] - discrimination via so-called "Reasonable, and non-discriminatory" terms
 +
* [[Patenting data formats]]
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==

Revision as of 08:56, 14 April 2014

Patents harm standards and compatibility by blocking the inclusion of necessary or important functionality.

Standards and compatibility are essential for software - more so than other fields. If a word processor or a video player cannot read popular document or video formats, it is simply not a functional word processor or video player. Reading other formats and protocols, regardless of how innovative, will not suffice to fulfil the role of being a document reader or video player.

Standards with patent problems

Possible defence against non-disclosed patents

From Wikipedia:[3]

In 2005, Qualcomm, which was the assignee of US5,452,104 and US5,576,767, sued Broadcom in US District Court, alleging that Broadcom infringed the two patents by making products that were compliant with the H.264 video compression standard.[4] In 2007, the District Court found that the patents were unenforceable because Qualcomm had failed to disclose them to the JVT prior to the release of the H.264 standard in May 2003.[4] In December 2008, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's order that the patents be unenforceable but remanded to the District Court with instructions to limit the scope of unenforceability to H.264 compliant products.[4]

Can you help? Need to rewrite the paragraph from Wikipedia to fit ESP Wiki.


Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

General articles

Specific standards harmed

References