Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:43:40 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080626/0155411526.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080626/0155411526.shtml buzz about how MVNOs (Mobile Virtual Network Operators) were going to be the next big thing. The idea was that any brand could start offering mobile phone service just by slapping its brand on mobile phones that would work on someone else's network. Then you could have a company with a huge brand jumping into the mobile phone space, adding various "synergies" (gag) from other business lines, without having to worry about the technical infrastructure of running a mobile network. The problem, which really was sort of obvious from early on, was that no one could explain why anyone would want to buy mobile phone service from a non-mobile phone company. And, indeed, all of the "big brand" MVNOs died rather gruesome deaths.

The second generation of MVNOs were supposed to be different however. Names like Amp'd and Helio weren't building on existing brands, but planned to build up huge new brands by themselves, and would do so by focusing on the high end, offering all sorts of neat phones, applications and services that the big mobile operators were afraid to offer. Actually, the reality was that the big mobile phone operators knew enough to recognize that people just didn't want those things, which is why they weren't offered. Amp'd flamed out spectacularly, burning through $360 million and attracting a negligible number of customers.

And, now, Helio has basically given up the ghost as well, selling off to Virgin Mobile -- about the only mobile phone MVNO that has managed to hang in there. From the sound of it, Virgin basically was doing a favor to Helio, to make its initial backers (Earthlink and SK Telecom) save a little face, rather than just shutting down the service.

So, with this, can we officially declare the era of the MVNO over? Or will we see breathless reports a year or two from now from new analysts in the space claiming a great new market in "branded" mobile phone services?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> or-will-they-rise-again? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080626/0155411526 Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:21:00 PST Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080124/16382062.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080124/16382062.shtml "a mobile entertainment and communication device." Reading the patent, you realize it describes the quite common smartphone. It's a patent for a mobile phone with removable storage, an internet connection, a camera and the ability to download audio or video files. The patent holding firm who has the rights to this patent wasted no time at all. At 12:01am Tuesday morning, it filed three separate lawsuits against just about everyone you can think of, including Apple, Nokia, RIM, Sprint, AT&T, HP, Motorola, Helio, HTC, Sony Ericsson, UTStarcomm, Samsung and a bunch of others. Amusingly, the company actually first filed the lawsuits on Monday, but realized it was jumping the gun and pulled them, only to refile just past the stroke of midnight.

As the link above explains, the patent itself is based on a bunch of continuation filings, which are commonly used by patent holders who want broad patents to cover the latest technologies well after they've already come about in the market. It would seem like the concept itself, merely combining a bunch of things that people were already talking about, should never have been granted based on the Supreme Court's recent KSR ruling that merely combining existing concepts doesn't deserve a patent. Also, as noted in the comments to the link above, it would appear that there's a fair amount of prior art. In fact, Apple even sent over some prior art concerning the patent just before it was originally supposed to be issued last summer -- but somehow patent holder's lawyers talked their way around it. In the meantime, it looks like we've got yet another case of an overly broad and obvious patent being used against a huge number of firms. I'm sure that's exactly what Thomas Jefferson expected when he created our patent system.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> wasting-no-time http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080124/16382062 Tue, 18 Sep 2007 12:56:00 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070917/172051.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070917/172051.shtml Techdirt Insight Community give their thoughts on how competitors should respond. There were, as per usual with the experts in the community, some really insightful and interesting responses. From that, we've been able to sign new business helping companies formulate and execute on their latest strategies. However, it seems that not everyone is taking a proactive approach to responding to the iPhone (or, at least they're not willing to admit it publicly). Gizmodo points us to an unintentionally amusing article where Laptop Magazine tried to get four competitors to give their thoughts on the iPhone. Rather than admitting that the iPhone has really shifted how many people view mobile phones and what they can do, all of the companies basically toe the corporate line, look the other way on iPhone questions and make sure to mention their own phones as many times as possible. Given the market response, however, it seems pretty clear that Apple is delivering what the market wanted, while these other guys have not. Insisting that you do have what it takes when the market is shifting elsewhere isn't going to be a winning strategy. Of course, we're here to help. If companies want to formulate a real strategic response to the iPhone, they might want to give us a call.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> oooh,-look-over-there! http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20070917/172051