Experts question Microsoft's Caller ID patents

Some experts raise concerns about a power grab by Redmond

Microsoft declined to answer questions about what its Caller ID patent claims cover. The technology is new and its patent applications are still pending, according to an e-mail statement from David Kaefer of Microsoft's Intellectual Property & Licensing Group.

However, the company said its Caller ID license agreement is not limited to any single patent, but covers rights to any Microsoft patent or patent application involved in implementing the Caller ID specification, Kaefer said.

"Microsoft wants to do more than merely give (Caller ID) away, they also want to make sure nobody else can profit from it," said Steve Frank, a partner in the patent and intellectual property group of the law firm Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault LLP in Boston.

That should not be surprising, considering the time and money it has invested in designing the new architecture.

"Since they're dedicating it to the public free of charge, (Microsoft) doesn't want to be the patsy who builds a foundation just so other people can come along and erect a building on it, then sell the building," he said.

To protect its investment, Microsoft reserves the right to incorporate other groups' improvements to Caller ID back into the specification free of charge, using a so-called "reciprocal license," Frank said.

Such a process will encourage all parties involved to allow the Caller ID technology to develop and improve without being hindered by license restrictions or royalty schemes, Kaefer and Frank said.

While Microsoft's intentions may be benign, the company's reliance on individual license agreements with domain owners is unconventional, especially if the intention is to encourage broad Internet adoption of Caller ID, Frank said.

"The traditional way to do this is not through reciprocal licensing but through a standards body that has its own rules for how people can develop the initial technology and exploit improvements," he said.

Groups such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. (IEEE), the IETF and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) have rules for adopting and protecting another company or group's intellectual property as part of a technical standard, and are well-situated to take over and promulgate the Caller ID specifications, he said.

"Those groups have tremendous industry support and can facilitate adoption and get things done on an efficient basis," he said.

Microsoft may be avoiding standards groups because it does not want to submit Caller ID to a lengthy approval process or negotiate with other stakeholders such as Yahoo Inc. or America Online Inc. over the final product, Frank said.

However, in shunning standards organizations, Microsoft is acting contrary to a "standard Internet ethos" that technical standards should be free of legal entanglements, said Robert Sanders, chief architect at Atlanta, Georgia, ISP Earthlink Inc.

"It's clear that standards that are unencumbered are the most successful on the Internet, and I don't think it's any different here. It's in everybody's best interest to make (Caller ID) easy to implement legally and technically," he said.

Sanders had not reviewed Microsoft's license agreement for Caller ID, but said any standard that is not unencumbered legally makes him "nervous."