Game Changer? AVB Now And In The Future
Where AVB (Audio/Video Bridging) networking is presently at and what it could mean
+- Print Email Share Comments (3) RSS RSS

The other AVnu founders are Harman, Cisco, Intel, Samsung and Xilinx, while “Promoter” members include Analog Devices, Applied Micro, Audinate, Avid, Barco, Lab X Technologies, Marvell, Meyer Sound, Pelagicore, Sennheiser and Shure.

As you can determine from those names, AVB and the AVnu Alliance encompass consumer electronics, automotive and pro AV markets.

By definition, proprietary technologies are owned by the inventors, who need to create a revenue stream, typically by selling both licenses to use the technology and chipsets that implement it. That creates a vicious cycle: the up-front licensing fees discourage manufacturers from adopting the technology, limiting its usefulness and value.

That in turn limits the demand for products using the technology, which keeps per-unit manufacturing costs high. That, of course, keeps the cost of the products and/or network option high, which further limits demand, raising costs, and so on.

This doesn’t mean that no one is making a living off of digital audio networking. But it does mean that none of these technologies has expanded overall demand for pro AV products and services the way MIDI did in the 1980s and computer-based recording and production did in the 1990s.

Keep in mind that AVB is non-proprietary - no licensing fees. Once consumer electronics and automotive markets come on line, AVB network interfaces will become as cheap as sand, or at least highly refined melted sand (silicon) that embodies a large dollop of intellectual property.

There’s no doubt that, unlike its proprietary predecessors, AVB will change the game. The big questions now are when and how.

Christian Doering, M.B.A., CSI, CDT, provides marketing services to pro AV and lighting companies through his company Me, Ink.


Comments (3) Most recent displayed first
Posted by GeoffOT  on  05/18/10  at  11:32 AM
The decision about royalties didn't belong to Metcalfe, nor did the rights to the patent. As is normally the case, it was assigned to his employer. Xerox decided on a one time license fee for the Ethernet patents of $1,000. Xerox actually collected that fee for several years (easy because you had to obtain some registration items in order to implement the standard). Metcalfe followed the opportunity to make money by founding an Ethernet company (3Com (for Computer Communications Capability)) that could pursue the Ethernet market in a more focused manner than Xerox could ever conceive of.
Posted by Christian Doering  on  05/18/10  at  09:19 AM
All true, and thanks for the information. Also true, however, is that to date no one has thrown up a financial road block to AVB's adoption as a global, cross-industry platform for innovation and inter-operability by claiming that it involves essential patents.

Before Ethernet became an IEEE standard, it was invented by two engineers who were, at the time, working for Xerox. Neither Robert Metcalfe nor David Boggs made a dime from licensing or royalties. Metcalfe was apparently smart enough to realize that attempting to do so would have killed his baby. He still managed to do OK, having been a founder of 3COM and now a general partner at Polaris Ventures.

Posted by GeoffOT  on  05/16/10  at  09:53 AM
Chris' assertion: "Keep in mind that AVB is non-proprietary - no licensing fees." is not quite correct. Standards may (emphasize "may") include "essential patents", that is it requires that to implement the standard, you may need to get into territory that is covered by a patent. Getting the right to use such a patent is still the responsibility of the implementor. There is certainly no guarantee that there won't be licensing/royalty fees involved.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.