Motorola suing Hytera for patent infringement

[N9IIT]

Not saying HYTERA and those employees didn't do as alleged, but can they prove these allegations of downloading 7000 documents 8 years prior?

You betcha /\/\otorola can. You know a company like that also has super tight IT security, and records of every file that goes in and out of there.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

(snip)
Also, Motorola believes they can prove that their IP was "stolen" by former Motorola engineers who they know went to work for Hytera. Assuming that Motorola can demonstrate that linkage to the satisfaction of the court, Motorola has won their case (within the limits of whatever non-disclosure agreement or non-compete agreement the engineers signed when they left Motorola).

Assuming for the moment that the three engineers did NOT as alleged, make off with thousands of documents from Motorola. Remember they are not the ones being sued. The exhibits provide no support of those allegations. Motorola has in past filed criminal charges against a female Chinese Engineer, yet in this case did not despite claiming overwhelming evidence. Is the end game to crush Hytera or extract royalties?

Look at the features being patented and tell me how DMR will work minus those features? And look and see that most appear to be simple logic decisions like scanning for a TG or time slot. The networking patents seems to be some confusing extrapolation of Iridium. The automatic volume control is a feature I have seen in some luxury GM vehicles to adjust the radio according to cabin noise. Hardly novel.

I hope Motorola has extracted purloined software code to bolster their argument because a few simple flow charts won't convince a jury. I think the strategy is one to overwhelm a jury.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_ambush

SEE FRAND reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_patent

I really don't have a dog in this fight. I just want to play devils advocate and I will be watching with interest. If this really is what Motorola claims, it says a lot about corporate loyalty (a rocky two way street) , economic danger of H1B Visa's and greed (of all parties).

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

You betcha /\/\otorola can. You know a company like that also has super tight IT security, and records of every file that goes in and out of there.

Yet they let 8 years pass? They certainly may think so in hind sight.

 

[jim202]

I have seen Motorola act like THOR way back in the 70's. They have always been a very poor bid looser. They try to push their weight around and bully anyone that undercut them in any bid they lost. This is nothing new on their part.

But the mighty M monster has been selling off all sorts of the little arms they use to have and try to make money off of it. The current management have not seen the light and as such are raising up the bar to the point of taking any bid they loose to court.

Many agencies I know that go out for bids put a clause right up front before getting into any meat of their bid. It basically says that can reject any and all bids in the best interest of their agency. So when the yelling and hollering with the fists coming down on the table, they just pull the vendor bid that is causing the commotion and toss it in the trash can.

Motorola doesn't like this type of move, but they have caused it to happen. Bottom line is they are hard losers and don't take well to loosing a bid, even if their bid is higher. They come up with all sorts of reasons to object. They can cost agencies huge sums of money in legal fees doing this.

My look into the future, is that your going to see more and more legal challenges by Motorola as time passes on all sorts of issues. Think we are just starting to see the true blood come out of Motorola because of poor management to have the company survive.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Despite my comment about H1B, the alleged Pitiful Plastic Portable Patent Purloiners were long term Motorola employees. So that must have put Motorola's panties in a bunch when all three quit.

GeeSiong Kok
Senior Vice President RND Center at Shenzhen Hytera Technology Limited
Senior Engineering Manager
Motorola Solutions
1987 - Year 2008 (21 years)

Platform products development. ELM; Entry Level Mobile and MotoTrbo; DMR portables

YihTzye Kok

Sales Director at Hytera Communications Co., Ltd
Software Architect
Motorola Solutions
May 1997 - June 2008 (11 years and 2 months)

Software Architecture development for Radio products, DMR Mototrbo

Samuel Chia

Software Engineering Director at Hytera Communications Co., Ltd.

(Patent records list Samuel Chia as a Motorola employee in 2002)

 

[JRayfield]

What does bidding have to do with patent infringement lawsuits and accusations of theft of intellectual property?

John Rayfield, Jr.

I have seen Motorola act like THOR way back in the 70's. They have always been a very poor bid looser. They try to push their weight around and bully anyone that undercut them in any bid they lost. This is nothing new on their part.

But the mighty M monster has been selling off all sorts of the little arms they use to have and try to make money off of it. The current management have not seen the light and as such are raising up the bar to the point of taking any bid they loose to court.

Many agencies I know that go out for bids put a clause right up front before getting into any meat of their bid. It basically says that can reject any and all bids in the best interest of their agency. So when the yelling and hollering with the fists coming down on the table, they just pull the vendor bid that is causing the commotion and toss it in the trash can.

Motorola doesn't like this type of move, but they have caused it to happen. Bottom line is they are hard losers and don't take well to loosing a bid, even if their bid is higher. They come up with all sorts of reasons to object. They can cost agencies huge sums of money in legal fees doing this.

My look into the future, is that your going to see more and more legal challenges by Motorola as time passes on all sorts of issues. Think we are just starting to see the true blood come out of Motorola because of poor management to have the company survive.

 

[JRayfield]

Just because a protocol/system is a 'standard' does not mean that there are no patents covering it. Motorola holds patents on certain aspects of DMR and P25. Anyone who wants to produce a product for either of those protocols may have to license certain intellectual property for those protocols from Motorola. Being a 'standard' does mean that Motorola has to license their intellectual property on 'fair and reasonable terms' to anyone asking for such licensing.

Here's a link regarding this subject:

https://www.motorolasolutions.com/e...logy-licensing/standards-based-licensing.html

John Rayfield, Jr.

Assuming for the moment that the three engineers did NOT as alleged, make off with thousands of documents from Motorola. Remember they are not the ones being sued. The exhibits provide no support of those allegations. Motorola has in past filed criminal charges against a female Chinese Engineer, yet in this case did not despite claiming overwhelming evidence. Is the end game to crush Hytera or extract royalties?

Look at the features being patented and tell me how DMR will work minus those features? And look and see that most appear to be simple logic decisions like scanning for a TG or time slot. The networking patents seems to be some confusing extrapolation of Iridium. The automatic volume control is a feature I have seen in some luxury GM vehicles to adjust the radio according to cabin noise. Hardly novel.

I hope Motorola has extracted purloined software code to bolster their argument because a few simple flow charts won't convince a jury. I think the strategy is one to overwhelm a jury.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_ambush

SEE FRAND reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_patent

I really don't have a dog in this fight. I just want to play devils advocate and I will be watching with interest. If this really is what Motorola claims, it says a lot about corporate loyalty (a rocky two way street) , economic danger of H1B Visa's and greed (of all parties).

 

[celestis]

Didn't a Chinese MSI employee try to get away to the PRC several years ago with a load of iDEN trade secrets and when caught said something along the lines of "oh, it's outdated, this shouldn't matter"?

Hmmm...

 

[slicerwizard]

Look at the features being patented and tell me how DMR will work minus those features? And look and see that most appear to be simple logic decisions like scanning for a TG or time slot. The networking patents seems to be some confusing extrapolation of Iridium. The automatic volume control is a feature I have seen in some luxury GM vehicles to adjust the radio according to cabin noise. Hardly novel.

Exactly. Those patents shouldn't even exist.

8,116,284 Infingement

The accused products also “search[] for an available timeslot when the default timeslot is unavailable.” For example, the XPT White Paper states that “[t]he home repeater will broadcast the XPT system’s status information in each frequency via a beacon signal. This informs the radio of available channel resources. In the case of a busy channel, the radio can switch to an available channel and slot to communicate.”

Yeah, that's LTR logic. And iDAS logic. But it's DMR, so only Motorola can do it...

 

[SCPD]

While back I noticed a couple things about one of the models they sell, while it had similiar appearance in the housing minus a couple buttons I thought to my self give it time mother Motorola does not like competition. Sure enough here it is.

 

[celestis]

While back I noticed a couple things about one of the models they sell, while it had similiar appearance in the housing minus a couple buttons I thought to my self give it time mother Motorola does not like competition. Sure enough here it is.

Which models would those be?

 

[N9IIT]

Just because a protocol/system is a 'standard' does not mean that there are no patents covering it.

Yup. Just ask Cisco Systems.

 

[dragoncooler]

Anyone else think it might be a good idea to get MD-380s before they either get pulled off the shelf or sky rocket in price?

 

[jonwienke]

No, because Motorola is not the owner of the DMR specs.

 

[prcguy]

The MD-380s are made by TYT and its Hytera that is having problems with Motorloa.
prcguy

Anyone else think it might be a good idea to get MD-380s before they either get pulled off the shelf or sky rocket in price?

 

[JRayfield]

Not exactly correct. As I pointed out in a previous post, Motorola Solutions owns patents that cover some of the DMR technology. They also own patents that cover some of the technology that covers P25. To legally produce and sell a DMR or P25 compatible radio, a company may have to license that technology from Motorola Solutions. Since that technology is covered under a 'standard' (such as ETSI, for DMR), then Motorola Solutions can not deny a request to license that technology to another company and such licensing must be done under 'fair and reasonable terms'. However, that technology is "owned" by Motorola Solutions.

John Rayfield, Jr.

No, because Motorola is not the owner of the DMR specs.

 

[jonwienke]

"Motorola Solutions’ DMR Standards-Based Licensing program grants rights to Motorola Solutions’ DMR essential patent families. Since our patent portfolio is large and expanding, additional patents determined to be essential to the DMR standard are occasionally identified. Once identified, Motorola Solutions declares the patent to ETSI and DMR licensees automatically gain access to these patents without additional cost or administrative burden."

https://www.motorolasolutions.com/e...censing/dmr-essentials-licensing-program.html

Hytera is a member of ETSI. The only patents Motorola could sue another ETSI member for are the ones related to the proprietary MotoTRBO addons to DMR, not the DMR standard itself.

 

[JRayfield]

Yes, definitely the case with proprietary aspects to MOTOTRBO.

It references "DMR licensees". I would take that to mean licensees of the DMR technology which has been licensed from Motorola Solutions. Information that I've read on the ETSI website indicates that a company would need to license the use of the technology from the manufacturer, not ETSI, even if the technology has been included as part of the ETSI standard.

John Rayfield, Jr.

"Motorola Solutions’ DMR Standards-Based Licensing program grants rights to Motorola Solutions’ DMR essential patent families. Since our patent portfolio is large and expanding, additional patents determined to be essential to the DMR standard are occasionally identified. Once identified, Motorola Solutions declares the patent to ETSI and DMR licensees automatically gain access to these patents without additional cost or administrative burden."

https://www.motorolasolutions.com/e...censing/dmr-essentials-licensing-program.html

Hytera is a member of ETSI. The only patents Motorola could sue another ETSI member for are the ones related to the proprietary MotoTRBO addons to DMR, not the DMR standard itself.

 

[jonwienke]

a company would need to license the use of the technology from the manufacturer, not ETSI, even if the technology has been included as part of the ETSI standard.

That statement directly contradicts "Motorola Solutions declares the patent to ETSI and DMR licensees automatically gain access to these patents without additional cost or administrative burden."

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Looking suspicious for Hytera:

In the Hytera documents titled : RS420_Roaming_R1.0.pdf, and IP Multi-site Connect_Application Notes_R2.0.pdf there is blatant plagiarizing of Motorola's System_Planner_6880309T12_YD.pdf

Examples

MOTOROLA:
3.2.4.1.4.2 Wide Area Network Configuration
The largest benefit of IP Site Connect is the ability to connect sites over public Internet Service
Provider (ISP) links as well as private high speed connections. ISPs provide a range of
technologies with varying bandwidth. IP Site Connect supports the following technologies (as long
as the requirements listed in the backend Network Considerations section are met):
• Private T1
• DSL (typically ADSL)
• Cable Modem
• Broadband Wireless Access. For example; Public Canopy provided by WISPs [Wireless
Internet Service Providers])
• ISDN
• Frame Relay

HYTERA:
4.2.2 Wide Area Network
The biggest advantage of IP Multi-site Connect lies in that it can connect dispersed sites
quickly through the internet provided by an ISP, which provides a range of technologies for
IP Multi-site Connect:
�� Dedicated T1
�� DSL (typically ADSL)
�� Cable modem
�� Broadband wireless access such as Canopy
�� ISDN
�� Frame relay

Note they did even not bother to remove Motorola's Canopy as an option.

The roaming document reads word for word a copy of Motorola's.

Not that plagiarizing is illegal. I have even watched a major vendor plagiarize an entire design description I proposed to an RFP when the client sent both of our competitive proposals back for a BAFO . Their second proposal included a feature copied word for word for mine. It was a response to a requirement for replicating hospital MEDCOM over 800 Trunking. I guess they figured if they plagiarized mine they couldn't lose any evaluation points. They won the deal and had to make it work even though in plagiarizing they created performance issues for themselves.

The question here is, did those three engineers actually purloin code and was that code installed in Hytera products? So far the exhibits don't fully support this contention.