Next-gen SIM vote delayed by device maker deadlock

[Ben]

A vote to decide the next-generation SIM card standard has been delayed for a minimum of 30 days after technology companies were unable to reach an agreement at an ETSI meeting, reports French financial daily Les Echos.

Nokia is believed to be unwilling to license essential patents if Apple’s royalty-free nano-SIM proposal is adopted, while Sandisk has rejected Nokia’s alternative proposal. According to FOSS Patents, Sandisk also holds patents that may be essential for the new SIM card standard.

Nano-SIM technology is seen as an important step in the miniaturisation of smartphones but Motorola Mobility, Nokia and BlackBerry-maker RIM are opposing Apple’s attempts to make its own technology the industry standard.

Meanwhile,CNET reports that RIM has accused Apple of attempting to affect the ETSI vote, by having Apple employees change their company affiliation when casting proxy votes.

RIM made the accusations in a letter to the ETSI, arguing that three Apple employees had registered as working for Bell Mobility, KT and SK Telecom. RIM said that these individuals should not be able to participate in the vote as proxy voting is not allowed.

A recent Financial Times report said that Apple had applied for six of its European subsidiaries to become part of the ETSI. Subsidiaries with revenue of EUR8 billion or more have up to 45 ETSI votes. If Apple is successful in this move, its number of votes would exceed Nokia’s 92 votes.

Nokia has said as Apple doesn’t currently have any essential patents related to the nano-SIM proposal, its offer of free licensing is meaningless. A spokesperson added that this makes Apple’s proposals seem like “an attempt to devalue the intellectual property of others,” IDG News Service said earlier this week.

http://www.mobilebusinessbriefing.co...deadlock/23268

Just a bit too much politics in this for my liking. As I understand it, Apples Nano-SIM proposal has quite broad support, but Nokia, RIM, and Motorola are lining up against it. The way I see it, they're trying to prevent Apple from getting skin in the game, when what they should be doing is saying "Hey, Apple made something that it's going to give us all access to for free, awesome."

[Wilt]

If it is true that Apple has been registering subsidiaries in order to get this vote through then it's fairly shady on Apples part.

While I understand there will be a certain amount of reluctance by the others to allow Apple to dictate standards going forward, I am sure that if Apples solution really was technically superior it would prevail. Everything that I have read up until now has claimed that it isn't, though.

I get the feeling that this is Apple attempting to subvert established industry practice in order to benefit themselves further down the line, with technologies which they most certainly would not be giving away for free.

In fact, if it is true that Apple doesn't have any IP that they would be contributing for free anyway, this could be seen as an attempt to hoodwink the other players into giving IP rights away for free, rather than using the FRAND principals for licensing.

Apple are anything but altruistic, so offering IP for free must have some benefit for them - either now or in the future.

[Ben]

It benefits them because they get to use the technology they want, that is advantageous to their planned designs, as a standard that will be widely adopted and so not sidelined.

If Apple's practices regarding registering subsidiaries are what it takes to put it ahead of Nokia in terms of numbers of votes then how the hell is Nokia inflating its votes so highly? So long as Apple's subsidiaries qualify, I'm not sure I see the issue. I doubt they're the first to do it.

[Wilt]

But it doesn't appear to be the technology the others want. Perhaps I am falling for some clever PR spin by the others, but pretty much every other major handset manufacturer has been mentioned in the press as being against the Apple proposal. You can't be telling me that they are all irrationally rejecting it because they don't like Apple?

I'm not sure what the rules are for who gets how many votes - looking at the figures up there, though, Nokia aren't using the same tactic as Apple.

[Ben]

On the other hand, the operators seem to be lined up to support Nano-SIM.

Apple's legal policy (thermonuclear war, as the late Steve Jobs put it) has made some serious enemies. I don't think those denouncing Nano-SIM need any other reason.

Apple seem to be the only company focussing on reducing the size of the SIM card. I certainly commend them for that part. That said, I concede that it's entirely possible the Nano-SIM proposal could have a lot of politics attached, particularly in the area of royalties (or the neutralisation of).

[Ben]

This is quite interesting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17560258

Nokia argue that Apple's proposed card is the same length as the current width of the micro-Sim, and therefore fails this requirement.

The requirement being that the card is not easily confused with existing cards. Nokia's solution is, according to the article, smaller.

[Hands0n]

I take Wilt's point that Apple is anything but altruistic. At least, under Steve Jons, there was always an agenda of dominance and growth. And that, of course, is entirely reasonable and to be expected of any growing corporation. But now that they have reached what may be near their pinnacle they do have a duty back to industry, community and its customers to introduce some altruism into their game. But will their rise to that duty? Past history suggests that is unlikely.

The nano-SIM is going to happen no matter what. It will need to be a single standard if the notion of this technology is to succeed going forward. But who is to say that fragmentation of the technology will not occur? I think a bumpy ride ahead, Nokia still have not learned from their recent hiding in the business and have a [I'd say] misplaced confidence that they will be world dominators again. That particular ship has long sailed, Nokia have yet to realise this.

So, as with the infighting here with UK LTE, I suspect we can see artificial delays in the nano-SIM technology arriving. But then again, right now, who cares?