The battle for digital TV standards: the market has the final say

mdsfnsa

The battle for digital TV standards: the market has the final say [Copy link]

The six-year-long dispute over the digital TV terrestrial transmission standard has finally come to an end. The three standard proposals from Tsinghua University, Shanghai Jiaotong University, and Guangdong Institute of Technology, which were once incompatible, will eventually be released as a "convergent standard" that combines their own unique technologies. However, this does not mean that all three parties will be the beneficiaries of the final standard, because the standard must go through a one-year trial period, when the market will decide which is the real standard.

　　The "convergent standard" that has been fought for

　　"There will be news about the standard soon!" Wang Xingjun, a core figure in the development of the digital TV terrestrial transmission standard at Tsinghua University, said this, revealing a hint of joy in his ease.

　　The digital TV terrestrial transmission standard has been included in the national major science and technology industry engineering project since 1996, and it has been 10 years since then. Since the standard is the core of the digital TV industry chain with a scale of one trillion yuan, various research and development units and the corporate alliances behind them have formed a confrontational trend of competing for standards and then competing for the world. Since 2001, when Shanghai Jiaotong University, Guangdong Institute of Technology, Tsinghua University, and Chengdu University of Electronic Science and Technology submitted five sets of standard proposals to the state, various interest groups have entered an increasingly fierce standard dispute. It was not until 2003 that Tsinghua University and Shanghai Jiao Tong University remained as the finalists.

　　Why did the Tsinghua and Shanghai Jiao Tong University proposals, which should have been opponents in the finals, have to be merged into one standard? The industry generally believes that the "melting" of several unrelated proposals together is not due to the need to integrate "multi-carrier" and "single-carrier" technologies, but in fact a balance of interests among all parties.

　　Today, although the public release of the standard is just around the corner, the tense and mysterious atmosphere still lingers, and the complexity and subtlety of the game between the various forces can be seen. In recent days, relevant experts have been asked by the ministries and commissions not to disclose any information to the media, and the Beijing Mobile TV operator, Beijing Broadcasting Media, which is the implementation unit of the standard, also refused to be interviewed.

　　The market is the final judge

　　It is understood that the "integrated standard" is based on the DMB-T solution of Tsinghua University, and also integrates the characteristic technologies of the solutions of Shanghai Jiao Tong University and the Broadcasting Institute of Science and Technology. But the problem is that Tsinghua University's solution is relatively independent and complete. After two rounds of patent evaluation by the State Intellectual Property Office, it can be almost determined that it has completely independent intellectual property rights. Although there is no conflict in integrating Shanghai Jiaotong University's technology on this basis, it will increase the complexity of the technology and manufacturing costs. In other words, the "fusion standard" solution has redundancy. Relevant experts from the radio and television department have publicly stated that the "fusion standard" will increase costs by 30%.

　　Of course, the redundant "fusion standard" cannot escape the test of the market. During the one-year commercial trial period after the "fusion standard" is issued, the application department and equipment manufacturers have the right to choose the main application mode from the multiple technical modes that meet the national standards, just like entering a "supermarket". For cost considerations, manufacturers will not choose redundant technical patents, so market feedback will ultimately determine whether the "fusion standard" needs to be modified.

　　"Integrity" is the key

　　Although the "freak" of the "fusion standard" flows with the "blood" of compromising the interests of all parties, whether the national standard has complete independent intellectual property rights cannot tolerate any "sand".

　　In fact, a true independent standard requires that all technologies in the standard have independent patents or do not involve foreign patents. Even if one technology involves a foreign patent, the value of the independent standard will be greatly reduced, because foreign countries can use this patent as a bargaining chip to demand the exchange of China's independently owned patented technology. Then the so-called Chinese independent standard will lose its due voice and initiative, and China's "passive beating" situation caused by the lack of independent standards will not be fundamentally changed.