Breaking News

IEEE Waves Through Controversial Patent Policy

1 saves
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
User Rank
IEEE - best days behind it?
anon1930   4/23/2015 5:44:28 PM

A number of companies have announced that they either are not going to participate or will reduce participation in IEEE standards development.  They don't seem to recognize that they need standards contributors.

I think the IEEE is fine for insurance but for standards development it has slid down hill in the integrated circuit space.   Sure, the 802.x standards get implemented in ICs but that is due to the legacy connection to 802.3 so many years ago.   What other standards in an IC are IEEE?  PCIe, USB, HMC, SPI, i2C, HDMI, SATA, etc are all non-IEEE standards which have done well witihout the IEEE.  

User Rank
Re: Raise the percentage
lakehermit   4/6/2015 2:46:52 PM
The problem here is that IEEE is disrupting the free market, sort of like socalized technology. Once the free market is disrupted then the incentive to invest large amounts of money in R&D with the resulting technology being put into standards is removed. Because the investors have no ability to realize a reasonable return via standards participation, one likely outcome is that new technology will become proprietary with each manufacturer having their own technology which is incompatible with other manufacturer's products. Another possible result is that R&D will be greatly reduced by all manufacturers leading to commodity products with thin profit margins. Either way the consumer will ultimately be hurt. 

User Rank
Raise the percentage
dt_hayden   3/27/2015 4:57:46 PM
I have not read the IEEE policy, but if it really comes down to "Compensation for a company's IPR would now be based on a percentage of component price rather than the whole device, as is generally the norm.", then so what?  Perhaps it puts the components negotiator at an assumed dissadvantage, but at the end of the day, it comes down to how much value is added and how much will be payed as royalty.

If a chip copany is used to getting say 5% of the product wholesale cost (5% of $400 for example, or $20), make it 200% of the chip cost instead (200% of $10, or $20).  The dollars are what matter and it seems as though the hangup is what determines the basis of the percentage calculation.  It's as if the chip developers automatically assumed the royaly would be 5% of their $10 chip (in a $400 product).  What am I missing?

User Rank
IEEE Conference , March
jzws   2/21/2015 8:24:05 AM
Anyone interested in finding out more about or commenting on this policy, check out this conference



User Rank
Re: IEEE Waves Through Controversial Patent Policy
docdivakar   2/17/2015 7:48:39 PM
This was a burning issue for a while, I don't know if IEEE can come out on top no matter which way it ruled. The status quo did put some of the smaller players in the standardization process at a very serious disadvantage. Indeed the tech community is quite divided on what a component vendor can claim in a 'system' based on the valuation of the latter. The good old use case of Ice Maker in a Refrigerator flourished for a number of years -it did give the Ice Maker's vendor a rather unfair valuation for its IP based on the entire Refrigerators! Back then, many refrigerator vendors did cry foul but paid the royalties nonetheless!

How ever, the onus is now on the players who participate in the standardization process and would like to see their proposals implemented for competitive advantage. This is a double edged sword. One could choose to not disclose anything and keep secrets proprietary and many still do just that, while others are revealing what is minimally necessary to participate in standardization.

Qualcomm has to tread carefully here. As is, it is negoting with different monetization models in China. Developing countries will definitely welcome what now appears to be a more reasonable basis for royalties for wireless communication.

It may work in favour of Qualcomm's and others in its camp in the long run, offset by higher volumes.

MP Divakar

More Blogs
Left unsaid in the announcement is what this new partnership entails, and on whose chip Waymo is running the heavy-duty deep-learning algorithms.
Spurred by the growth of low-cost, additive 3D- printing, conductive inks have regained attention in recent years despite having existed for quite some time.
Mentor's Charley Selvidge has been thinking that the operating system of a hardware emulator is a natural evolution of the way software systems are built for emulators.
As FPGA-based realizations become bigger and more complex, synthesis tools that deliver an automated flow are the obvious choice for creating optimized designs in a timely manner.
The industrial IoT (IIoT) has moved from interesting concept to full-fledged revolution, yet embedded developers and industrial engineers are caught between keeping things working and making the “big leap.” Charles J. Lord is here to help.
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed