Might Be Nothing New Here.
arch 22, 1999
Qualcomm, Ericsson near deal?
By Lynnette Luna
Tensions ran high at the International Telecommunication Union two-week
meeting on third-generation technology in Fortaleza, Brazil, as the industry
waits for an agreement between Qualcomm Inc. and L.M. Ericsson on
cdmaOne patents.
Qualcomm and Ericsson won't comment on progress made in negotiating a
settlement over Code Division Multiple Access Standard-95 patents at
issue in a Texas court. A trial is set for June 7. Sources close to the
companies, however, indicate the two already have reached terms for a
settlement and are hammering out the details. An announcement could
come within weeks. Qualcomm employees were sternly warned not to
comment on the matter. Ericsson spokeswoman Kathy Egan said ‘‘the
rumors are flying.''
A settlement potentially could give the companies access to each other's
technologies and settle the dispute over intellectual property rights to 3G
technology. Qualcomm and Ericsson today remain deadlocked over 3G
patents. Both claim to hold patents to W-CDMA and cdma2000
technologies—two major radio transmission technologies the ITU is
considering for 3G networks that are incompatible. The ITU is trying to
move ahead despite the IPR deadlock to decide on a family of standards
this year.
The loud message coming out of Fortaleza last week was that the ITU
increasingly is taking its cue from industry and that it wants a limited
number of 3G standards. The two-week ITU Plenary meeting that ended
Friday resulted in a draft recommendation outlining the key characteristics
of 3G radio interfaces, which restructured work done in last month's Kuala
Lampur, Malaysia, meeting. Last month's meeting resulted in the ITU
rubber-stamping all 16 radio transmission proposals submitted by
standards bodies and other entities from around the world.
The draft obtained by RCR adopts a similar framework decided by
wireless executives at a February TransAtlantic Business Dialogue meeting
in Washington. U.S. and European wireless executives agreed to pursue a
framework for an umbrella CDMA standard that combines common
elements of competing CDMA technologies and gives operators the ability
to choose from three different CDMA modes—W-CDMA, cdma2000
and a Time-Division duplex mode for unpaired spectrum. TDMA backers
keep their technology intact as well.
Yet major challenges of translating TDMA and umbrella, tri-mode CDMA
technical characteristics into standards and resolving controversial technical
and trade issues remain.
‘‘A lot of work needs to be done, but the foundation is there,'' said Frank
Urbany, international senior vice president for BellSouth Corp.
The chip rate issue and synchronization schemes remain hurdles for
harmonizing the CDMA proposals even further. W-CDMA backers and
cdma2000 supporters remain deadlocked over harmonizing the chip rate.
W-CDMA supporters do not want to move the rate below 3.84
Megachips per second, citing capacity reasons. Cdma2000 supporters say
they need the rate to stay at 3.68 Mcps to remain compatible with today's
cdmaOne systems.
‘‘There was not much harmonization at this meeting,'' said a person who
attended the meeting. ‘‘The hope is that some strong words will come out
of the London (carrier) meeting to provide some guidance.''
In a series of meetings in recent months, carriers from around the world
have met to discuss harmonizing the CDMA proposals. They are set to
meet today and tomorrow in London in a meeting similar to one held in
Beijing in early January involving 14 operators from Asia, Europe and the
United States. Carriers also remain split over the chip-rate issue.
Back in the nation's capital, the debate continues on whether the United
States should be entertaining a 3G wireless trade war with Europe.
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), chairman of the Senate communications
subcommittee, wrote U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky last
week urging her against taking retaliatory trade action against the European
Union for locking out CDMA technology.
‘‘I believe ... that the more drastic options at your disposal should be
reserved for well identified anticompetitive trade practices or market
barriers,'' said Burns. He suggested the United States pursue 3G trade
concerns through ‘‘the appropriate bilateral and multilateral means, such as
the World Trade Organization.''
In addition, the Information Technology Industry Council is said to have
sent letters to key lawmakers on commerce and trade committees
informing them of the 3G consensus reached at February's TABD meeting.
It is unclear, however, whether the Clinton administration is ready to back
off 3G—one of several flashpoints in current U.S.-EU trade relations.
‘‘We are monitoring the ITU standards process and EU member-state 3G
licensing decisions to assure U.S. technologies receive equal treatment,''
said a U.S. official.
|
