republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Australian Agency Wins Wi-Fi Lawsuit in U.S.
Other WiFi companies may be next
(old news - 11:20AM Saturday Nov 18 2006)
tags: legal · wireless · world
Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) recently won a WiFi patent lawsuit against Buffalo Technology, obtaining royalties on a patent awarded to Buffalo in 1996. According to a WNN article on the lawsuit, CSIRO’s success has encouraged the company to consider pursuing royalties from others involved in the making of WiFi and related devices. Companies including Intel, Dell, HP, NetGear, and Microsoft have teamed up to fight CSIRO but jurisdiction problems may prevent them from actively doing so in a U.S. Court.

Related:
  1. Friday Evening Links
  2. India May Make Open Wi-Fi Hotspots Illegal
  3. Verizon To AT&T: The Truth Hurts
  4. FCC Imposes Shot Clock On Wireless Tower Builds
  5. Telus Sues Rogers Over Ad Claims
  6. Deutsche Telekom Looking For U.S. T-Mobile Partner
  7. Senators Want ACTA Made Public
  8. Sprint's Wireless Network Apparently Not 'Most Dependable'
Forums » Australian Agency Wins Wi-Fi Lawsuit in U.S.
view: topics flat text 
Post a:
peerimpact

join:2005-11-07
Londonderry, VT

Free Trade Agreement

That's what the US gets for getting counties like Australia signing Free Trade Agreements and making those countries enact similar Intellectual Property laws that can be possibly applied in the US courts.

The CSIRO waited until the Free Trade Agreement was finalised to go after Buffalo and other companies already pay them licensing fees .
russotto

join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA

Why patent law sucks

A reading of this decision demonstrates quite well why patent law sucks. When the judge was going over the reasons he wouldn't find the patent invalid, any small difference between the prior art and the patent was sufficient to find the patent valid. And further, Buffalo had to prove with clear and convincing evidence (the highest civil standard) that the patent was invalid.

On the other hand, when Buffalo was claiming that its product didn't infringe, CSIRO was able to claim that the difference between Buffalo's product and its patent was insignificant, and they only had to prove infringement by a preponderance of the evidence (the lowest civil standard).

With the law stacked against the alleged infringer this way, there's little chance of defense. Buffalo could have theoretically exactly implemented the prior art and been found infringing -- because in the first phase, the differences between the prior art and the patent would be considered significant, and in the second phase they'd be considered significant.
JimF

join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA

Re: Why patent law sucks

No, if they implemented the prior art, it would not be infringing under any standard.

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus

join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net


2 edits

This is what happens when.....


The Small Patent Holder starting to munch down on the big boys.

The Giant corporation eating up everything it wants. About to be nibbled on.
you don't do your patent homework. I think it's funny the big boys Microsoft at el, ripped off so many people in the early days to put their software together. I have been told stories more then once or twice by programmers my age who wrote sub routines for an OS and without a thank you or a job offer these bits of code magically appeared in MS-DOS, Windows, OS-2, Apple etc. The big boys must not have employed good patent attorneys if they had these shorts of surprises might not have happened at the very least they could have bought the patent holders out for cheap, now it is going to cost them, and it should, corporate arrogance, inattention, and stupidity should not be awarded. I am not saying I like what is happening but I think it is funny the small predatory fish are nipping at the fins of the Great White Sharks of the digital world and are taking their pound of flesh.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind.

insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN

Stupid judge?

"The patent describes multipath transmission of data at frequencies higher than 10 GHz"
Wifi is 2.4ghz.
Forums » Australian Agency Wins Wi-Fi Lawsuit in U.S.


Friday, 27-Nov 19:24:00 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.