Wednesday, December 12, 2007

CTIA To Set Mobile Bar Codes Standard?

A mobile bar code mandate?

Maybe this is the push the US needs in order for camera phones and bar codes to connect.
scott shaffer
CTIA -The Wireless Association® announced today a request for information (RFI) on behalf of its Code Scan Action Team. The RFI is being sent to a wide range of companies with an interest in the Cameraphone Barcode Scanning (CBS) space.

An important opportunity presents itself in the United Sates where Code Scanning is relatively unknown. While some countries are building many small islands of Code Scanning activity, there is potential in the U.S. to support and develop a common architecture that enables a mass code-scanning market.

CTIA’s Code Scan Action Team, comprised of industry representatives, is currently in the process of evaluating solutions to implement CBS on wireless phones in the United States. The purpose of this RFI is to understand and evaluate partner capabilities and interests in Code Symbologies, Code Scanning client applications and Proposed Business Models to support CBS, among other areas.

This is in addition to the mobile bar code standard the International Air Transport Association (IATA) created.

The International Air Transport Association (IATA), a trade body that represents 240 airlines and 94% of scheduled international travel, has reached an agreement on a global standard for mobile barcodes, which it says "paves the way" for air travelers to use mobile phones for check-in at airports.

Last year Neomedia Technologies was leading the efforts for the Mobile Codes Consortium. Based on Neomedia's latest financial statement, and with the US Patent Office agreeing to review their patents, I don't see this initiative being taken serious by the mobile industry.


Anonymous said...

It would be interesting to find out who is on the "Code Scan Action Team" don't you think? Have you obtained th list? Just wondering....

RTS said...

I agree. Who is on that team and how do we find out.

Ron said...

Recently got an offer to join the IATA Mobile Barcode Commity for a considderable ammount of cash every year.... Guess this works the same way with the CTIA

Anonymous said...

you're about to have some major egg (or should I say banana) on your face monkey boy ;)

Scott Shaffer said...

Find the cherries, don't polish the pits.

Anonymous said...

Find the cherries, don't polish the pits!?!?! This is a lame quote. Your credibility in the mobile space is on the line, especially if, the other company you are pumping does not have the best mobile reading application to offer an end to end solution. Someone hit it on the head here:
Your blog is one step behind the times. Never a leader only a follower.

I highly doubt that you will post this because you are afraid of others knowing the truth. I have seen you alter past posts in your favor.

Scott Shaffer said...

I started researching the idea of connecting a physical object with the Net almost 10 years ago. It was over 3 years ago that I started publicly discussing Physical World Connection. That is when a machine readable identifier would be scanned and connect a physical object to the Net via mobile phone.

During this time I have seen many companies enter and leave this space before it is even adopted in the US.

My suggestion, instead of relying on blogs for your information, which according to you, are biased or published from opinions, I would read this document in its entirety.

In my opinion, there are much better opportunities in the PWC space.

Like I said before...Find the cherries, don't polish the pits.

The Physical World Connection space will be huge and many ways to be rewarded. There are a lot of juicy cherries out there.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Your statement bashing NeoMedia and MC2 made you look like a real idiot Scott.

I told you, you would have egg on your face ;)

QUALCOMM is now a member of MC2. Enough said.

Anonymous said...

Don't bash Scott's credibility. He is dead on in this. Having followed the OMA developments, I seriously doubt that their standards doc will be good news for Neomedia. Since their doc will be oriented to defining open direct code formats, it will go counter to the Neomedia patents that are based upon a proprietary switching platform.

The US carriers are moving away from that approach and don't necessarily like the OMA's direction. Thus the need for this document. But they also are not fans of a Neomedia exclusive switch either. Given the EFF patent attact on Neomedia, Neom has a lot of work to do to prove that it can be a real player in the future of this space.

brewskih said...


Responding to some posters here, is a waste of your breath. Their kindergarten tactics of name calling and personal attacks, shows just what level they are on.

I wonder if the first anonymous poster has the list of who is on the CODE SCAN ACTION TEAM? Its been stated as fact that NEOM was not only been asked to respond to the RFI, and has responded, but is also heading up that team, and there was a meeting in June about this in June following the CTIA event. The funny thing is the request went out on Dec 10th based on my interpretation of the pr, with a 10 day deadline to respond to the RFI request.

As to the gomo web blog, you might want to read the latest comments posted by myself there, if you want to see the real facts with links to the articles.

This GSMA pr just put out, is not much different then the one put out by thew MMA back on 5 Dec., in which the GSMA agreed to the MMA's guidelines for mobile marketing advertising, in the Asia Pacific region, where the technology is far advanced compared to the rest of the world.

Those doing the personal attacks, and hiding behind the anonymous moniker, are the ones who have had the egg thrown on their face over and over again over the past couple years, as the link you provide clearly illustrates. They haven't been right on one issue with NEOM, but as shareholders, feel the need to trash everyone who has been right. I think in the investment world they are better known as PUMPERS.

Dean Collins said...

After reading the RFI my simple question is ....."what value does the CTIA feel they can add here and how do they think the RFI process will bring this about".....

Dont bother looking for answers in the document - it doesn't explain at all what they hope to achieve once they collect all the information.

At the end of the day all that proprietary coding /closed standards offer over and above open standard (read qr codes) is the ability for more accurate and densely packed information eg. smaller codes for more information.

eg check out the size of the qr code on my contact page is pretty big but has all my vcf contact information.

The problem with proprietary is they all want money…even the .org proposal from shotcode wont really be open and will still be controlled (in the dns/url redirection).

My statement I make time and time again is in 12-18 months from now it will be irrelevant.

Every new mobile phone with camaera you buy these days is above 2mb - more than enough for any 2D codes that are tightly placed using the qr standard.

Guys you had your chance and you blew it with infighting and legal patent disputes.

Users and content providers are now passing you by while they watch your vc funds/share prices drop.

it’s like SIP or any other open technology....we dont need a controlling body any more - if you want to value add it will need to be in applications rather than standards.

Dean Collins

Rick said...

Response to Dean Collins - Your comment here is off base a little. How can you consult without suggesting that some sort of standards are necessary? If all handsets could read all codes - then there truly would be no need for company proprieties as you say. Every phone would be able to read anyone's codes and get the information needed - whether direct or indirect link or codes containing the amount of information as your contact page. Standards are the answer or the cell phone use of codes will be ignored by the user.
I think the CTIA RFI is looking for a way to give the cell user in the USA (at least) a way to read any 2D code and then allow a link to whatever company proprietary system is needed. Then, as you suggest, no one will care who owns a propriety "code" in the future.