I should have been a patent lawyer. Actually, everyone in the wireless industry should be glad I did not become a patent lawyer because there is little reason to think I would have been a good one.
Trying to piece together all of the moving parts as Nokia Siemens Networks tries to buy Motorola Inc.’s wireless networks business is complicated enough for me. NSN, which has had a difficult time entering the U.S. market, is simply trying to do what companies have been doing for years – buy its way in through the acquisition of Moto’s radio access networks business. Moto was eager to get rid of the business as part of its split into what it hopes is a lucrative device business and a lucrative solutions business that concentrates on enterprise and government solutions, not commercial-grade RF solutions for telecom operators. But Huawei, which was rumored more than once as a frontrunner to buy Moto’s RF business, but has been dogged by “security” concerns, is concerned that the sale of Motorola assets to NSN will give NSN access to Huawei intellectual property because Huawei and Moto have worked together for 10 years. But Motorola thinks Huawei stole some of its IPR back in 2000 through a third company called Lemko. (That case is an awesome read, by the way – accusations of illegal file transfers, one-way airline ticket and last-minute arrests at the airport by U.S. Custom authorities. The problem, of course, is until the matter goes to court, who knows what is true.)
Meanwhile, the Chinese government is taking its time reviewing the NSN/Moto acquisition and some in the U.S. government have been vocal about giving Huawei too much presence here. In the meantime, 7,500 Motorola employees (are they Motorola employees?) sit in limbo, waiting for decisions to get made. It’s a wonder any business gets done.
But back to the IPR matter: Wireless vendors have always bought equipment from each other; partnered with potential competitors; tried various joint ventures that either worked or haven’t. There must be mounds of paperwork associated with each one of those scenarios as companies try to protect what is theirs, yet move forward with what they perceive to be a better business plan.
Now keep in mind I do not understand the nuances of patent law so I mean no disrespect to any of the parties involved, nor am I pointing any fingers at any of these companies. But how do you know, frankly, who owns what in an industry where everything has to interoperate with everything else and advances are made all of the time? What’s a significant advance vs. an insignificant one? The patent lawyers tell you.
There have been some heady patent disputes in the wireless industry, the most memorable one for me being L.M. Ericsson vs. Qualcomm Inc. back in the late 1990s. Ericsson had largely dismissed CDMA technology in favor of GSM and TDMA technologies, but the two were butting heads over cdmaOne patents, which Ericsson claimed were based in part on its technology. In the end, rather than a drawn-out court fight, Ericsson – much to my surprise – bought Qualcomm’s infrastructure business, cross-licensed each other’s technologies and the CEOs held a love fest in New York City announcing the deal.
It jaded me, I suppose. I thought there would be a clear-cut answer on which powerhouse was right. We’d been following every twist and turn of the arguments for months only to have them kiss and make up? What kind of fight is that? One that moved industry forward, for sure, but one that was a bit of a letdown. I’ve learned through the years, that most seem to end this way, the notable exception was when Research In Motion Ltd. paid NTP a cool $600-plus million.
