dailywireless.org » Broadcom Vrs Qualcomm, Verizon & M2Z Vrs FCC

Broadcom Vrs Qualcomm, Verizon & M2Z Vrs FCC

Federal Appeals Court Judge Haldane Mayer gave a split decision in the Qualcomm Vrs Broadcom chip spat. Qualcomm and Broadcom have different takes on the split decision.

Broadcom’s suit threatened Sprint’s use of Qualcomm chips to deliver push-to-talk over their EVDO cellular network (among other things). The split decision now effectively allows Qualcomm customers to import wireless devices containing Qualcomm’s infringing chips. Companies directly affected by the Qualcomm chip ban included Kyocera, Motorola, Samsung, Sanyo, LG Electronics, AT&T and T-Mobile USA.

While Sprint is not included in the latest ruling, the company is working with Qualcomm on a software workaround to sidestep the Qualcomm chip ban. Verizon Wireless already committed up to $200 million to pay Broadcom a license fee that will exempt its products.

But Qualcomm is still handicapped by having its banned chipsets effectively blacklisted from new designs, which may be behind Motorola’s recent move to focus new designs on alternative suppliers such as Texas Instruments, says Fool.com. So while Qualcomm can claim victory in this round of the battle, it hasn’t emerged unscathed.

In other legal news this week, Verizon Wireless filed a lawsuit against the FCC’s 700 MHz rules that would require the eventual winner of the spectrum offer open devices and applications.

The No. 2 mobile-phone carrier said the FCC action “violates the U.S. Constitution, violates the Administrative Procedures Act … and is arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by the substantial evidence and otherwise contrary to law.”

The FCC in August attached open-access requirements to a 22 megahertz block of spectrum—a third of the spectrum set for auction in mid-January—as part of its controversial 700 MHz decision.

Google and Verizon have different perspectives on “competition”.

According to Philip Verveer, a communications lawyer with the Washington, D.C., office of Wilkie Farr & Gallagher, these types of legal challenges to FCC rules are rarely successful. “I don’t know what basis one would have for launching a challenge of this matter,” said Verveer. “A successful appeal of this kind is rarely successful.”

Bill Barr (left), heads Verizon’s legal, regulatory and government affairs group. Cynics might conceivably interpret Verizon’s actions as a tactical move — it makes Verizon appear to be disadvantaged by the FCC’s lenient interpretation of “open access” and may help to get critics like Free Press off their back — when maybe they don’t really mean it.

One thing is indisputable — Verizon has a lot riding on the 700 MHz auction — and RUS funding of a “walled garden”. If Frontline gets 22 MHz for “public service”, Verizon’s federal IWN contract might be put on hold — forever. Verizon can’t afford to screw this up.

Here’s a rundown of the 700 MHz offering this January:

A nationwide 10MHz paired block carries with it a mandate to provide a public safety network in addition to any private use
A 22MHz paired block is divided into 12 regional licenses that have open device and software
A 12MHz paired block of 734 metro area licenses
An economic area block of 176 licenses, 12MHz paired
An economic area block of 176 licenses, 6MHz unpaired

M2Z Networks, meantime, has made good on its threat to take the Federal Communications Commission to court, asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to overturn the agency’s dismissal (pdf) of M2Z’s nationwide wireless broadband plan.

M2Z said the agency violated numerous laws in throwing out its proposal to provide free, family-friendly broadband service in the 2155-2175 MHz band.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin recently said the commission plans to launch a proceeding to examine rules for that spectrum. Here’s Martin Statement, Copps Statement and Adelstein’s Statement (pdfs), on the 2155-2175 MHz band proposal.

Another aspect of the M2Z Networks plan, notes MRT Magazine, is that public-safety entities would be given priority access to the network, which caused a coalition of public-safety organizations to express support for the proposal. However, public-safety officials have noted that the M2Z network would not be hardened or otherwise optimized for public-safety use.