The European Telecommunications Standards Institute may be at a crossroads now that Qualcomm Inc. has outlined the terms under which it will grant intellectual property rights to wideband Code Division Multiple Access technology.
ETSI in January chose W-CDMA technology, based on a Global System for Mobile communications platform, as a third-generation technology choice for mobile networks and has been determining which companies own key IPR to the new specification. While other vendors have indicated they will cooperate in offering up their IPRs under ETSI policy, Qualcomm in April said it would do so only if the ETSI proposal is converged with W-cdmaOne, a wideband technology based on Interim Standard-95 technology. This solution provides for backward compatibility. Qualcomm is an innovator and license-holder of cdmaOne technology, which has yet to make an entrance into Europe. Qualcomm claims to hold key patents to CDMA technology regardless of bandwidth.
ETSI, backed by the powerful GSM MoU Association, so far has resisted heavy lobbying efforts from U.S. manufacturers and interest groups that want to see a converged proposal come out of ETSI. Convergence, proponents say, results in economies of scale for products and components, and many argue GSM-centric Europe is working to protect the interests of its own vendors.
ETSI, along with standards bodies in the United States and Japan, must submit a 3G open standard to the International Telecommunications Union by June 30. The ITU is looking to institute a single world standard that would provide for global roaming and high-speed data rates, among other things.
Qualcomm indicated in its April letter that it believes some companies are attempting to make W-CDMA purposefully incompatible with cdmaOne technology. The efforts to accomplish compatibility, said Qualcomm, appear to result in a W-CDMA standard that reduces performance and lowers quality and spectrum efficiency.
Qualcomm outlined several technical changes that must be made to ETSI’s proposed standard, including lowering the chip rate from 4.0 Mcps to 3.68 Mcps for 5-megahertz bandwidth. The chip rate has become the point of contention for many who do not want to converge W-CDMA with W-cdmaOne technology. They argue a lower chip rate will compromise system quality, while convergence proponents say no technical problems exist in lowering the rate.
ETSI has given Qualcomm 90 days to clarify whether or not it is prepared to grant licenses according to the terms of its IPR policy, which simply requires manufacturers to grant licenses on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions for manufacturing, selling or repairing equipment.
“They just want a yes or no answer, and in asking for that, they’re obligating us to say no,” said Dan Pegg, senior vice president of public affairs with Qualcomm. “Certainly going forward, convergence is in everyone’s best interest. The marketplace would be the greatest beneficiary of that. A single standard for worldwide roaming is really what the end user wants, and it seems rather short-sided to protect old technologies and existing markets and deny a solution that would create much larger markets for everyone.”
Whether ETSI will compromise is unclear. The standards body could not be reached for comment despite repeated attempts. ETSI must present a proposal to the ITU that is clear of any IPR hurdles.
Some people argue that L.M. Ericsson and others may hold licenses that would preclude Qualcomm’s intellectual property rights.
Ericsson is the only major vendor that has not licensed IS-95 technology from Qualcomm, and Qualcomm has indicated that all its current IS-95 CDMA licensees would be granted access to its intellectual property used in the third-generation standard without being charged any additional upfront fees. This could give IS-95 licensees that are ETSI members incentive to get the issue resolved. But Ericsson, as many have pointed out, has a strong influence with its GSM carriers in Europe, and Ericsson says the majority of operators worldwide want to move ahead with ETSI’s W-CDMA proposal and aren’t interested in backward compatibility.
The million-dollar question is whether a huge technical disadvantage really exists when converging the two technologies, or if the entire issue is simply political posturing by companies that want to gain an upper hand and preserve their current investments around the world. It may come down to compromises in the 11th hour.
“As you go to 3G, why would you not want to have backward compatibility with cdmaOne? You’re expanding the market. That justification would have to be very strong,” said Ira Brodsky, president of Datacomm Research Inc. in St. Louis, Mo. “You would have to show how that really translates into a key edge for the consumer. You need to translate that into real issues of throughput and coverage, or network costs, anything along those lines.”
Bo Piekarski, vice president of development and strategic planning with Ericsson Inc. in Dallas, said: “With the issue of harmonization, the bottom line is that the majority of the world’s operators support a W-CDMA proposal that is a more advanced version of CDMA than the current version. And they don’t want the technical issues and baggage of having to have backward compatibility of any standard, be it GSM, D-AMPS or IS-95. Plans are to have dual-mode phones to solve this.”
Piekarski maintains major differences remain between the two CDMA proposals that will help the end user, including increased range of handsets with the use of an adaptive antennas and the ability to mix micro and macro cells.
“The problem is, [the cdmaOne group] has not submitted enough technical contributions in these other standards bodies,” he said.
The cdmaOne camp maintains that many operators are interested in convergence as long as the proposal is not technically disadvantaged. Japan’s standards body has indicated there was no technical reason not to adopt some of the key parameters-specifically the chip rate-specified within the w-cdmaOne specification, the CDMA Development Group has noted.
Similar arguments over convergence are occurring in the United States, which is likely now to submit multiple standards to the ITU. Qualcomm’s claims to IPRs also could become an issue in the United States because one Telecommunications Industry Association working group plans to push forward with W-CDMA. Japan reportedly is looking for a way to harmonize the two CDMA proposals.
The continued feud over standards will only hurt carriers, say analysts.
“Unless there is a good feeling of some single standard in place that will give their suppliers economies of scales on a worldwide basis, carriers will take a wait-and-see attitude,” said Bob Egan, research director with the Gartner Group in Stamford, Conn.
