Qualcomm blames misinformation for IPR squabbles

GIVEN THE number of squabbles over IPR [Intellectual Property Rights] and patent disputes in the wireless industry, Qualcomm decided to hold a little IPR workshop for those journalists attending the CTIA show here in Las Vegas.

The INQ ended up being more baffled that it was pre-workshop. Lots of the confusion, apparently, involves what are known as pass through rights. These provide a licensee with the ability to grant rights to Qualcomm's patents to a third party.

Qualcomm is adamant that no ASIC manufacturer has the right to 'pass on' its patents to a third party. What it effectively means is that handset manufacturers still have to pay royalties to the company, if they start using ASICs with Qualcomm's patents built in.

Fortunately the buck stops with the handset vendor which can then 'pass on' Qualcomm's rights to its customers - the network operators. Complicated, isn't it?

Worse still, there appears to be one exception to all of this - a certain Chinese manufacturer of handsets has a different arrangement with Qualcomm. Only Qualcomm's spokesperson couldn't reveal the name of the company involved.

So how did these IPR disputes arise, anyway? Well, Qualcomm did reveal that it wasn't on the standards bodies for either GPRS or EDGE. Consequently, it didn't have to disclose any relevant patents.

Thus Qualcomm's just noticed that chip companies like Broadcom seem to be breaking its complex rules over licensing in the realms of GPRS. Something like six years after the event.

The INQ then asked Qualcomm whether it had participated in the standards bodies for HSDPA and HSUPA (sometimes known as superfast 3G). Which would meant it had revealed its relevant patents. The answer appeared to be Yes.

The INQ had also asked about Qualcomm being a member of the standards body for MBMS (which has been created by the 3GPP as a standard for mobile video). Qualcomm flatly refused to answer that question.

That's interesting as MBMS is a potential rival to Qualcomm's own MediaFLO.

The bit the INQ liked the most was Qualcomm's assertion that "fundamentally all patents are not created equal." Obviously some patents are more equal than others. Sounds a familiar argument. µ