Intel-ectual Property

[rd@cottonwood.com (Rick Dahlgren)]

It seems to me that we are fast approaching an important clash between a
company's right to develop comptetitive products and the necessary
disclosure of such proprietary information in the public interest.

In our case, US West entered into a secret agreement with 3DO for
development of software for use in developing content and for a set top
terminal that could receive and display on a content created using 3DO's
proprietary "Director Extractor" for connection to a public common carrier
network, that, without disclosure, hobbled anyone else (us) from providing
a digital channel.  

That disclosure or lack of it is important moving forward because of a
conflicting set of laws and regulations.  In our case we discovered at
trial that 3DO originally had proposed providing disclosure to all
potential providers.  US West circumvented that by requiring that all
disclosures would be made through it under strict non-disclosure
agreements.

Ultimately 3DO went along by entering into the contract.  US West and its
hand selected partners secretly developed content and the rest is history.

FCC requires that common carrier networks provide transmission services
"coupled with the means" by which (going back to telephony) any and all
calls can be placed and received by end user customers.

The "means" compels disclosure.  But what happens to Intel's "property"
when it happens to contain such "means" somewhere in the processor along
with all of the other things the processor does.  Without disclosure of
everything else the processor does, does the "means" become inaccessable?

As network appliances (the PC is fast becoming one) set top terminals, etc.
include bundled features embedded into Intel's chips or Power PC chips or
whatever begin to provide "the means" for common carrier services, what
rights does the manufacturer have?

The problem needs to be solved if the internet is to be an open world wide
network.  The alternative is to have a bunch of little proprietary
subscriber based networks that simply will not interoperate.

Rick Dahlgren
Cottonwood Communications
rd@cottonwood.com