The Patent Wars are not new, the Battle for Mobile is

The battles we are now witnessing among tech giants for patents are not new. What is new is the realization that mobile is the new battle ground and the stakes are high.  In patent wars, it is a chess game and one of the objectives can be to stop the other vendor from succeeding. Often this can be mitigated by a cross-licensing arrangement that users rarely hear about.

In mobile, Microsoft  has been racing to catch-up and it is working hard to make sure it has plenty of armor (patents). Apple has been surging and it has been filing patents in droves for years. They learned the hard way (from all the Microsoft battles in the early years) that patents help sustain and protect the business. Apple has also been working very hard on doing the right patent acquisitions (note that Apple won the bid for the Nortel patents because it partnered with EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, RIM, and Sony).

Much of the talk has been around Google, its failed bid for the Nortel patents and this week, its hefty purchase of Motorola Mobility. Given that it failed on the Nortel bid, it didn't have much choice to buy Motorola and gain access to its 17,000 issued patents. What was ominous for Google was that Microsoft was one of the other bidders. That said, while Google is getting abused in the press about the Motorola price tag, it is getting 17,000 patents (Microsoft has over 18,000).

IBM has one of the biggest patent portfolios in High Tech, it is very good at creating patents and it has made a business out of licensing them. IBM plays the game very well and it is professional about it. It can get a little nasty with some of the others. Google could certainly learn from IBM and it looks like it has, since they just cut a deal with IBM to license 1,000 of its patents.

An example of patent licensing that many don't know about occurred in the copier market. Years ago, Canon had invented a new way of applying toner to paper and later a modular system for packaging toner cartridges. It brought Xerox to the table and a cross licensing deal was cut way back in 1978. However, while Xerox got access to the Canon patent portfolio, Canon gained access to Xerox's high speed paper handling patents and 20 years later, Canon eventually crept up into the departmental copier space where Xerox made a large majority of its profits.  There are always trade-offs to patent licensing deals.

In mobile, the battle it isn't just about patents on the core technologies, it is about the entire mobile ecosystem. More about that in some of our upcoming research. If you haven't checked out the newest research firm, Aragon Research, please stop by our site.

Instant Classic: What I said about eBooks in 2000

Ho, Ho Ho, my old firm deleted my great blog post on eBooks (because I'm no longer there). Thanks to Google, I got it before it disappeared into the ether. Here it is.

 What I said about Books in 2000

eBooks are no longer a dream of the future. I peered into the past and dug out some of the research we wrote about eBooks and digital paper back in the year 2000.

In Digital Paper: Is It Paper, a Display or Both?, Gartner Fellow Jackie Fenn and I wrote about the new medium that readers like the Kindle use. Here is what we said: “D-paper bridges the gap between traditional paper and display technologies. It has the potential to change the publishing industry, eliminating the huge barriers to entry in newspaper, magazine and book publishing. For the short term, signage will be the primary application. Web and hard copy content providers need to develop architectures that allow for content distribution via D-paper technology.”

The predictions from that Research note were:
By year-end 2004, electronic books will be the primary application for active D-paper (0.8 probability).
By year-end 2003, D-paper will be commercially available for a variety of output uses (0.8 probability).

The two vendors we mentioned in the Research note were Xerox (Gyricon Media Inc., which was spun out of Xerox PARC) and E INK, which is now the defacto leader in this display technology.

In E-Book Proliferation: Critical Factors, Rita Knox, Alan Weintraub (former Gartner Analyst) and I wrote about: “Publishers’ worst fears about e-books are that the books will be downloaded to an array of electronic devices, reducing sales of traditional books. These fears may not materialize. The revenue generated from e-books may not only offset a possible decline in paper sales, but may cause an increase in sales by expanding the potential audience for books delivered in any medium.”

The things we said about Devices, Software and Content:

“Devices:  E-book devices include not just e-book readers (e.g., NuvoMedia’s Rocket eBook and the SoftBook Reader) but any output device that can present e-book content — personal digital assistants, digital audio, interactive TV, audio and Braille devices (e.g., the Blazie 2000 Braille display) — to multiple senses (visual, auditory, tactile and multimedia).

E-book devices must supersede the familiarity and simplicity of paper books. Content vendors must rethink what electronic content delivery can do for readers. The answers to this challenge will determine the relative value of different delivery devices. The advantage of electronic content is that it makes delivery of content much more flexible, since it can be formatted for different output devices. This flexibility will allow consumers to read (or listen to) a book conveniently in different situations (e.g., at home, in the office, traveling or driving) and in different environments, so that e-books can better match individual lifestyles, preferences and limitations.

Software: Software is the major aspect of e-books that Microsoft has targeted (see Note 2). E-book software serves content to the various output devices. The most successful software will offer the greatest flexibility, allowing a reader not only to access the content from different devices, but also to access the same content at different times and places as the opportunities arise (e.g., from a handheld device at home, to a car’s audio system and then on an office PC).

Software vendors must overcome an array of challenges centered around the management of digital rights. The ease with which electronic content can be copied and transformed threatens publishers and authors. E-book software must support various pricing models, give access only to authorized users and prevent theft of the content (i.e., unauthorized copying). These protections should not unduly limit the flexibility and convenience that will make e-book delivery more attractive than paper.

Content: Before e-books become widely available, publishers and authors must be comfortable making their works available in digital format. Unfortunately, this issue lies farthest from a satisfactory resolution. Publishers remain nervous because appropriate rules (e.g., for reuse) have not been formulated, so the required theft-proof technologies are not defined, much less implemented. The content providers (e.g., publishers) must define the rules for pricing and reuse.”

In general we got it right and we predicted the future. However, it took longer for eBook Readers to become popular, partially because of the lack of digital content available them. The one thing we didn’t predict was that Amazon and Google would be players in this space….The good news now is that newspapers and magazines are finally realizing that paper is just one way of displaying content. For some content publishers it is too late, for others, it is just the beginning.

My Third Wave

Last night I took my Gartner ID Badge and put it in my drawer, right next to the Xerox badge I wore for 15 years. December 8th marked 11.5 years to the day of my time at Gartner and it was a great run. I leave behind many great times and some incredible people and incredible clients. As with everything though, times change.

I've worked with many CEOs in my time at Gartner. One of them that I've worked with the longest is Bobby Yazdani, Chairman and CEO of Saba Software. Today I start at Saba, where I'll be taking Collaboration to the next level as VP/GM of Collaboration.

Saba is primarily known in the Human Capital and e-Learning markets, but they have some formidable Collaboration capabilities. Rest assured, you'll be hearing more about that shortly.

I was CEO at a Non-Profit

During my last 1.5 years at Xerox and for my first 4.5 years at Gartner, I was the CEO of a non-profit. It wasn't something I sought out, it sought me. My college fraternity was in trouble, so I took over has head of the alumni corporation (e.g. often referred to as a House Corporation).

It was daunting at first, because many alumni presidents are glorified fraternity house landlords. Gradually, I rebuilt the House Corporation Board of Directors. My CFO, Scott Cassara, was incredible, particularly because when we took over, we were broke. Scott is currently SVP and CFO at DynCorp International. My other board member who stuck with me through all the tough times was Jeff Painter, who was also my college roommate. There were also other critical board members who contributed like Wil Woodrum, Joe Conaty, Dave Heatwole and others.

Running a non-profit corporation is really no different than running a for-profit firm. There are multiple things to worry about and it all has to be coordinated and seamless.  If you do a good job, people give back (buy). If you don't, they run away. We did a great job and alumni started contributing and giving back. They also come back, as we have the longest running alumni weekend of any alumni group at Penn State (the PSU-Sigma Chi Golf Classic, now in its 20th year).

In fact, after my stint as CEO, Jeff Painter and I helped launch a major capital campaign and remodeled the awesome physical plant we have at Penn State.  One of the best things we did as a board though was to hire and install a live-in House Mother who is still there. The Penn State Greek System would be better if all fraternity houses had House Mothers (like they do in the Mid-West and the South).

I'm proud of my time as CEO of Alpha Chi House Corporation. I put a lot into it and as I head back into Industry, I'll tap those experiences.

A Friend of Sales

In my farewell note that I sent to Gartner colleagues yesterday, I copied a whole bunch of sales execs in addition to all my friends in research. I said that I'd miss my friends in Sales because Sales is part of my DNA (in addition to marketing, I was a District Manager of Sales at Xerox).

After moving from Upstate NY to California in the second half of 2008, I got to know the whole Gartner Sales Office in San Jose, because I took the time to do so. The Managing VP, Pat Hoey and his Region Manager Dennis O'Malley and I became friends. When I was in the San Jose office (and I was there a lot), I would walk around and greet people. We'd talk about client facing issues. I helped a few client teams with their strategy, mainly because they asked for help. We also grew the business because we helped clients (large and small) solve some of their problems.

In so many firms today, Sales is viewed as a necessary evil. Marketing is not well connected with Sales and many marketing people don't understand the sales process. It sounds strange, but it is true in so many cases. Many functional managers don't view it as their role to help sales. That is wrong. In the old days at firms like Xerox and IBM, everyone in the company participated in a blitz day.

When you look at many firms today, leadership starts at the top. Companies that are growing are doing so because they are focused on customers. They listen to their customers and take actions based on the feedback.  Think about that the next time someone from sales asks for your help.