To: LBstocks who wrote (66919 ) 2/15/2000 11:20:00 AM From: Ruffian Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
Getting Crabby Over WAP By Brad Smith There's an analogy going around that compares the members of the Wireless Application Protocol Forum to a box full of crabs. Forum members may not appreciate the crustacean comparison, but there could be some truth in the tale, especially as it describes the current controversy over WAP intellectual property rights. The analogy drawn by Herschel Shosteck of Herschel Shosteck Associates Ltd. says the evolution of open industry standards such as WAP naturally involves companies that own essential IPRs-a group he likens to crabs in a large box. "You don't have to put a lid on the box, because if one crab tries to climb out, the others will pull it back in," says Shosteck. "The competition that results when industry standards are proposed can be a lot like that." So it was last week in Rome, when the WAP board met as part of a developers' conference. They decided to leave well enough alone, which means IPR issues will be resolved among the companies that own or license the patents. There was some grumbling about the meeting on developer newsgroup sites but the decision's impact remains to be seen. The issue arose after Geo-works Corp. announced Jan. 19 it was going to license its essential IPR for WAP. Geoworks insists it didn't want to stymie the future of WAP, a result some analysts believe could result from its licensing move. The WAP Forum says Geoworks' decision was surprising only because it was made public and that the WAP rules follow the traditional IPR rules long established in the telecom industry. Geoworks issued a statement after the Rome WAP meeting saying the forum and company had reaffirmed the forum's IPR rules and the company's intent to follow them. A company spokes-man says some WAP members were "irritated" by Geoworks' announ- cement but most agreed it was business as usual. The spokesman reiterated the company's intent to make its licensing as painless as possible for small developers especially. Geoworks plans to charge a $20,000 annual license fee for large companies but says it will consider waiving fees for small developers. Geoworks expects to announce some licensees in the next few weeks. WAP Forum Chairman Greg Williams, reached in Rome, says there had been talk at the developers meeting about IPR and the forum board decided that the rules were clear. He says he is confident that any disputes will be worked out among the companies involved. WAP membership now has grown to 307 companies, with 120 potential new members from the Italian meeting. "There's so much momentum [for WAP] that keen minds will work through this," according to Williams, a vice president for SBC Communications Inc. "We don't see it as something that will stop what we're working on." Other companies with WAP IPRs, including Nokia and NEC Corp., haven't announced licensing plans. One individual, Behruz Vazvan, was the first to file IPRs with the WAP Forum and have it accepted in April 1999. Vazvan works for Radiolinja Oy, a forum member, but says he developed his IPRs privately in the early 1990s. He says his IPRs cover several essential protocols, including WAP browser and gateway/server technology and several WAP applications such as prepaid and real-time bill payment. Vazvan says he has not sold or licensed his IPRs but plans to allow free use of them. Assuming that's true, the other crabs in the box likely will welcome him with open claws, er, arms.