| Bluetooth suit drags in more defendants, including Apple |
|
| by Stephen Withers | |
| Thursday, 29 March 2007 | |
  
Featured Whitepaper
5 Best Practices for Smartphone Support
Chip manufacturer Broadcom obtained a licence from WRF in 2005, so no products incorporating its Bluetooth chips infringe these patents. WRF licences intellectual property created at research institutions in Washington state. The four patents involved in the case were issued to Edwin Suominen, based on research he conducted as a student at the University of Washington and relate to radio receiver technology and methods of tuning radio channels used to exchange data between electronic devices without the need for cables. The foundation appears to have adopted a 'deep pockets' strategy by suing CSR's customers rather the company itself. It has also gone for a 'home court' advantage - CSR could not be sued in the US as it did not sell the chips containing the disputed technology in that country. If the defendants lose, they would have to stop selling Bluetooth-enabled products, switch to using Broadcom chips, persuade CSR to licence the WRF patents, or licence the technology themselves. For its part, CSR is countersuing WRF, claiming that the latter's case is without merit.{moscomment} |
Tags
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
