PDA

View Full Version : Kodak Files New Patent Infringement Lawsuits Against Apple and HTC




MacRumors
Jan 10, 2012, 03:44 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/10/kodak-files-new-patent-infringement-lawsuits-against-apple-and-htc/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/kodak_wordmark-150x43.jpg

With Kodak on the brink of filing for bankruptcy (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203471004577140841495542810.html) as it pursues an auction of its patent portfolio in order to remain solvent, the company today announced (http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120110007105/en/Kodak-Alleges-Patent-Infringement-Apple-HTC) that it has filed two new lawsuits alleging patent infringement by Apple and HTC.A complaint filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) specifically claims that certain of Apple's iPhones, iPads, and iPods, and certain of HTC's smartphones and tablets infringe Kodak patents that relate to technology for transmitting images. Kodak also alleges that certain of HTC's smartphones infringe a patent that covers technology related to a method for previewing images which is already the subject of pending actions against Apple. Separately, Kodak filed suits today against Apple and HTC in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York alleging the same infringement.

"As we have stated before, Kodak is the leader in digital imaging innovation and we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars creating our pioneering patent portfolio," said Laura G. Quatela, President and Chief Operating Officer, Eastman Kodak Company. "We've had numerous discussions with both companies in an attempt to resolve this issue, and we have not been able to reach a satisfactory agreement."The four patents being asserted against Apple include:- U.S. Patent No. 7,210,161 - "Automatically Transmitting Images from an Electronic Camera to a Service Provider Using a Network Configuration File"
- U.S. Patent No. 7,742,084 - "Network Configuration File for Automatically Transmitting Images from an Electronic Still Camera"
- U.S. Patent No. 7,453,605 - "Capturing Digital Images to be Transferred to an E-Mail Address"
- U.S. Patent No. 7,936,391 - "Digital Camera with Communications Interface for Selectively Transmitting Images over a Cellular Phone Network and a Wireless LAN Network to a Destination"A fifth patent is being asserted only against HTC.

Kodak first filed a patent infringement suit against Apple in January 2010 (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/14/kodak-files-patent-infringement-suits-against-apple-research-in-motion/), also targeting Research in Motion in the same effort. Apple filed a countersuit (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/19/apple-files-countersuit-against-kodak-over-alleged-patent-infringement/) a few months later in an effort to bolster its position against Kodak.

With the new lawsuits coming just as Kodak is attempting to stave off bankruptcy, the company appears to be attempting to demonstrate strength in its patent portfolio as it hopes to attract higher bids for its intellectual property. Even if the company is unable to avoid bankruptcy, its patent portfolio is likely to be one of the key assets to be sold off in a court-ordered auction following the bankruptcy filing.

Article Link: Kodak Files New Patent Infringement Lawsuits Against Apple and HTC (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/10/kodak-files-new-patent-infringement-lawsuits-against-apple-and-htc/)



*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 03:50 PM
Buyout Bait. For years now.

Get what you can, Kodak. Best of luck.

samcraig
Jan 10, 2012, 03:53 PM
Buyout Bait. For years now.

Get what you can, Kodak. Best of luck.

Sometimes I swear you're just a "bot" based on your predictable and fortune cookie responses.

xii
Jan 10, 2012, 04:00 PM
One worder. Ridiculous.

ravenvii
Jan 10, 2012, 04:17 PM
I applaud them on their plan to restructure rather than declare bankruptcy.

But this suing thing is a bit sad.

Gasu E.
Jan 10, 2012, 04:20 PM
I'm far too lazy to actually look up the patents, but from the title:

"Capturing Digital Images to be Transferred to an E-Mail Address"

Wouldn't this be obvious, as in two separate things: "Capturing digial images to a file" combined with "transferring file to an E-mail address"???

Slix
Jan 10, 2012, 04:22 PM
I heard the other day that Kodak was losing money. I'm going to guess this is part of the reason why... :rolleyes:

PlaceofDis
Jan 10, 2012, 04:26 PM
I applaud them on their plan to restructure rather than declare bankruptcy.

But this suing thing is a bit sad.

i'm guessing they're suing in hopes of either attracting a buyer or to get some money in order to stay afloat. they're a sinking ship, that much is sure.

jav6454
Jan 10, 2012, 04:40 PM
The naming of those patents is so broad. You can describe several (if not all) devices using any sort of communications.

*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 05:03 PM
Sometimes I swear you're just a "bot" based on your predictable and fortune cookie responses.

What other response could there be?

Kodak is on the verge of bankruptcy, and in any case they're angling for some extra value (based on patents) before a possible buyout.

jayducharme
Jan 10, 2012, 05:07 PM
Since the patent portfolio is up for grabs now, I assume this action might be an attempt to draw attention to that portfolio and find a quick buyer. Kodak at one time was a powerful industry, but the modern world has passed them by. When I was a kid, Kodak was just about the only name you'd associate with photography. Now they're an afterthought.

HyperX13
Jan 10, 2012, 05:37 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Kodak is going the way of Kojak!

rmwebs
Jan 10, 2012, 05:48 PM
Buyout Bait. For years now.

Get what you can, Kodak. Best of luck.

Looks like they took a leaf out of Apples book then :rolleyes:

*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 06:04 PM
Looks like they took a leaf out of Apples book then :rolleyes:

No.

Apple did the smart thing and hired new management. Apple was not sold off or acquired. The rest is history.

BC2009
Jan 10, 2012, 06:16 PM
Kodak is such a sad case. Here is a company that practically invented digital photography, but instead of bringing it to consumers, tried to milk the "film-based photography" for as long as possible. Why? Because they believed their "customers" were the drug stores that ran the film developing and they knew that digital photography would upset their best "customers".

Instead Kodak did nothing in digital for years, completely missed the digital revolution, and now is finally coming across some patents they owned from way back when which they never asserted and trying to go after companies that were actually smart enough to come up with the same things on their own.

Many of their patents fall in the "obvious" realm and simply need to be challenged and invalidated. The rest of their patents should be purchased and donated to the public domain. Let Kodak go out of business and pay off whatever they can to their creditors.

Once great company now produces next to nothing and becomes a patent troll -- so sad.

OrganMusic
Jan 10, 2012, 06:38 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I lived in a suburb of Rochester (where kodak is) in the mid 90s. Such a huge percentage of the area population worked there you almost certainly knew more than one person who did.

WiiDSmoker
Jan 10, 2012, 07:06 PM
Buyout Bait. For years now.

Get what you can, Kodak. Best of luck.

There is ZERO difference between what Kodak is doing and what Apple is doing when it comes to IP lawsuits.

Thunderhawks
Jan 10, 2012, 07:13 PM
Kodak is such a sad case. Here is a company that practically invented digital photography, but instead of bringing it to consumers, tried to milk the "film-based photography" for as long as possible. Why? Because they believed their "customers" where the drug stores that ran the film developing and they knew that digital photography would upset their best "customers".

Instead Kodak did nothing in digital for years, completely missed the digital revolution, and now is finally coming across some patents they owned from way back when which they never asserted and trying to go after companies that were actually smart enough to come up with the same things on their own.

Many of their patents fall in the "obvious" realm and simply need to be challenged and invalidated. The rest of their patents should be purchased and donated to the public domain. Let Kodak go out of business and pay off whatever they can to their creditors.

Once great company now produces next to nothing and becomes a patent troll -- so sad.

With their ineptness for decades, I am amazed they were smart enough to find their own patents (if they even apply)

If Apple and HTC drag this out they may be able to buy Kodak for dollar.
On the other hand this is something Google may buy:-)

PS: When in Rochester visit the Kodak museum. Makes one sad to see what would have been possible with a better management.

thekev
Jan 10, 2012, 07:53 PM
The naming of those patents is so broad. You can describe several (if not all) devices using any sort of communications.

Part of the issue there is that these are very old patents. Today nothing so generic would be approved (at least I would hope not).

Kodak is such a sad case. Here is a company that practically invented digital photography, but instead of bringing it to consumers, tried to milk the "film-based photography" for as long as possible. Why? Because they believed their "customers" where the drug stores that ran the film developing and they knew that digital photography would upset their best "customers".

Instead Kodak did nothing in digital for years, completely missed the digital revolution, and now is finally coming across some patents they owned from way back when which they never asserted and trying to go after companies that were actually smart enough to come up with the same things on their own.

Many of their patents fall in the "obvious" realm and simply need to be challenged and invalidated. The rest of their patents should be purchased and donated to the public domain. Let Kodak go out of business and pay off whatever they can to their creditors.

Once great company now produces next to nothing and becomes a patent troll -- so sad.

They've made digital camera sensors for years. They produced a 1 megapixel chip in the mid 1980s according to wiki (that part I didn't know). I'm not sure where they fell behind. They have had some of the best chips in the past decade, but in terms of sensors that move in suitable volume, I'm not sure where they stand.


With their ineptness for decades, I am amazed they were smart enough to find their own patents (if they even apply)

If Apple and HTC drag this out they may be able to buy Kodak for dollar.
On the other hand this is something Google may buy:-)

PS: When in Rochester visit the Kodak museum. Makes one sad to see what would have been possible with a better management.

It happens. Fuji seems to have transitioned pretty well. Both Xerox and Polaroid are still around, but they've been brutalized by transitions and restructuring.

shartypants
Jan 10, 2012, 08:00 PM
You shouldn't be allowed to just sell off patents like that. There should be a law that when patents are just sold off like that, they diminish in value by half. Unless you are the original business unit that created the patents because you have real products to protect, you shouldn't be able to enforce the patents. IMO.

blue22
Jan 10, 2012, 08:01 PM
Kodak is such a sad case. Here is a company that practically invented digital photography, but instead of bringing it to consumers, tried to milk the "film-based photography" for as long as possible. Why? Because they believed their "customers" where the drug stores that ran the film developing and they knew that digital photography would upset their best "customers".

This whole bankruptcy with Kodak is actually quite sad to witness :( They were once pioneers, and this shouldn't have been the mess that they found themselves in now. But ultimately a lot of it is of their own doing, unfortunately.



Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I lived in a suburb of Rochester (where kodak is) in the mid 90s. Such a huge percentage of the area population worked there you almost certainly knew more than one person who did.

The University of Rochester touted one of the most impressive and biggest, if not best, Kodak sponsored labs in the country for at least a couple of decades. Unfortunate to see all this infrastructure going the way of the dodo because of their short sightedness with digital film's viability and evolution.



PS: When in Rochester visit the Kodak museum. Makes one sad to see what would have been possible with a better management.

Yeah, it's pretty neat, definitely a worthy time capsule of history to behold.

apps1991
Jan 10, 2012, 08:01 PM
Kodak filed another lawsuits against Apple

george-brooks
Jan 10, 2012, 08:09 PM
Kodak makes really great products and is a very important company in my life as an analog photographer so I'd really really hate to see them go, but I don't think its wise for them to be going after Apple.

*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 08:11 PM
Kodak filed another lawsuits against Apple

Its a money-grab. It has nothing to do with protecting the integrity of their products, and everything to do with stuffing the pig a little more in the hope someone will want it for dinner (patents).

samcraig
Jan 10, 2012, 08:14 PM
What other response could there be?

Kodak is on the verge of bankruptcy, and in any case they're angling for some extra value (based on patents) before a possible buyout.

Sorry - whether or not they are going to be bought or whatever - should they not protect their patents just like you assert Apple should protect theirs. You are always one to point out that Apple SHOULD be protecting their IP. Yet Kodak shouldn't? Sorry - doesn't compute.

nostaws
Jan 10, 2012, 08:46 PM
The problem isn't Kodak or Apple the problem is the patent office for granting patents like “Capturing Digital Images to be Transferred to an E-Mail Address.”

Really??

*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 08:52 PM
Sorry - whether or not they are going to be bought or whatever - should they not protect their patents just like you assert Apple should protect theirs. You are always one to point out that Apple SHOULD be protecting their IP. Yet Kodak shouldn't? Sorry - doesn't compute.

Kodak's timing gives away their hand. Their intentions aren't about protecting IP for the purposes of product and brand integrity, but to extort whatever they can from anywhere in order to make themselves a more attractive buy. This is obvious.

samcraig
Jan 10, 2012, 09:00 PM
Kodak's timing gives away their hand. Their intentions aren't about protecting IP for the purposes of product and brand integrity, but to extort whatever they can from anywhere in order to make themselves a more attractive buy.

LTD - just admit - these are your speculations and stop passing them off as fact.

The FACT is - you have NO idea what the intentions and motivations are any more than you know what I'm going to have for breakfast tomorrow.

I hope that your opinions at least help you sleep at night though... Hate to think you had insomnia over companies going after Apple.

*LTD*
Jan 10, 2012, 09:02 PM
LTD - just admit - these are your speculations and stop passing them off as fact.

It's even in the article. And it's there because it makes perfect sense. Kodak is a sinking ship. Why else bother to launch lawsuits at this juncture? It's to attract suitors. It's certainly a reason, but a rather sad one, and one that could have been avoided had Kodak's management been a little more prescient in years past.


With the new lawsuits coming just as Kodak is attempting to stave off bankruptcy, the company appears to be attempting to demonstrate strength in its patent portfolio as it hopes to attract higher bids for its intellectual property.

samcraig
Jan 10, 2012, 09:22 PM
It's even in the article. And it's there because it makes perfect sense. Kodak is a sinking ship. Why else bother to launch lawsuits at this juncture? It's to attract suitors. It's certainly a reason, but a rather sad one, and one that could have been avoided had Kodak's management been a little more prescient in years past.

1) it's an article on MacRumors. Which is biased towards Apple.
2) It says the company APPEARS to be. Do you know the semantic difference between APPEARS and IS?

This is what I'm talking about LTD. The article is written with editorial comments and then you take those comments and twist them around to be some fact that isn't a fact.

The truth eludes you. It eludes everyone except those that actually work for Kodak in positions of power that are making these decisions.

SandynJosh
Jan 10, 2012, 09:47 PM
I'm old enough to think of Kodak as having a hand in preserving many many faces and events dear to me. So, to realize that this old company may disappear is, to me, anything but "a Kodak moment."

Sedulous
Jan 10, 2012, 09:48 PM
Sooo, Kodak patented the idea of sending a photo? Doesn't that mean anything that sends an email with attachments like a photo is infringing? Bogus.

MCP-511
Jan 10, 2012, 10:13 PM
They will get their day in court. Fair enough.

JCaternolo
Jan 10, 2012, 11:30 PM
+10 Points if you live in Rochester NY, HQ of Kodak;)

ppc_michael
Jan 11, 2012, 01:10 AM
Sad about Kodak. :( I still shoot their film in both still and cine form.

AppleMacDudeG4
Jan 11, 2012, 07:47 AM
This is a desparate ploy by a company that is not going to exist for too much longer. They would have been better off trying to sell their patents and get what money they can.

I really feel bad for Kodak. They did not keep up with the times and now the world has moved on and has left them behind.

interrobang
Jan 11, 2012, 08:17 AM
The truth eludes you. It eludes everyone except those that actually work for Kodak in positions of power that are making these decisions.
It doesn't take a psychic to see what Kodak's management is trying to do. They've publicly been saying that they intended to sell Kodak's patent collection to generate cash for months now.

Go read any reputable business publication's report on the news. They all give the same motivation for the lawsuits. It just makes sense; if you want to sell your patents (and Kodak has said that this is its #1 priority) then you need to demonstrate their value in the market.

spazzcat
Jan 11, 2012, 08:50 AM
Looks like they took a leaf out of Apples book then :rolleyes:

Apple makes and sells something, does Kodak make anything anymore or do they just sell their name to other companies to use?

CylonGlitch
Jan 11, 2012, 09:10 AM
The problem isn't Kodak or Apple the problem is the patent office for granting patents like “Capturing Digital Images to be Transferred to an E-Mail Address.”

#7,453,605
Want to know what is even worse? This was filed for in 2005! Hello, this had been going on for some time. I cannot see this patent being worth anything.

I'm quite sure that phones have been doing this for much longer. If I recalled correctly, my old Motorola phone did this when I moved to California and that was in 2000. All Apple would need to do is find evidence that this patent is null and void because the was prior art. Shouldn't be hard to get it thrown out.


Other Patents :

7,210,161 -- Kodak will have a hard time with this one because it requires communications parameters to be stored on "Removable Memory Card" which obviously Apple doesn't have. Filed 2001

7,742,084 -- Is IDENTICAL to 7,210,161 in almost every way. I mean the abstract is word for word the same. The drawings are EXACTLY the same drawings. There is some terminology differences here and there but overall it looks like the EXACT same patent. But Filed in 2007; way, way after all of these things were already being done.

7,936,391 -- Filed 2009. AGAIN uses the same drawings (that's OK) but the "Background of the Invention" is identical to the previous two listed above. The only real difference is the selection of image to be transferred. BUT the iPhones had already been doing this. No way this would hold water.


So basically, Kodak is trying had to do anything they can to make some money. I bet Apple will let these go to court and make Kodak PROVE that their patents are being violated, and of course Apple will continue to appeal and drag it out as long as possible (smart strategy in this case) to drive costs for Kodak way up and make them run out of cash. These patents are 100% lame. I know, I've written my share of lame (and valid) patents. :D

superdave5122
Jan 11, 2012, 09:13 AM
I think the solution is rather easy to see. Apple just needs to buy Kodak at a bargain price and add them and their patents to its portfolio!

CylonGlitch
Jan 11, 2012, 09:17 AM
I think the solution is rather easy to see. Apple just needs to buy Kodak at a bargain price and add them and their patents to its portfolio!

Why spend money buying patents that cannot be upheld when you can just wait them out. In the end it will cost less.

nylonsteel
Jan 11, 2012, 09:55 AM
re original article

i am so glad i dont have to go save-on and drop off my yellow roll of film to see my pictures any more. at least technology has moved to improve humanity for me in that respect. on top of that i dont have to pay to see my pics. fun part of digital pics now is all the naked pics

spazzcat
Jan 11, 2012, 10:14 AM
Why spend money buying patents that cannot be upheld when you can just wait them out. In the end it will cost less.

They do have some useful ones, just not sure Apple would want them...

scott911
Jan 11, 2012, 03:40 PM
They do have some useful ones, just not sure Apple would want them...

Agreed - Kodak has done exceptional research work... mgmt and marketing descisions failed them on many other fronts.

I'm sad for my many old classmates at RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) Imaging Science program -who in many ways created the Digital Photography Era.

Stella
Jan 11, 2012, 11:31 PM
If Kodak feels its patents are being infringed then they have a right to sue. It is up to the court to decide whether their claim is justified.

But hey, the armchair lawyers are good for pop corn entertainment! Maybe they should reconsider their career path...

Nostromo
Jan 11, 2012, 11:52 PM
Great!

At least someone is doing something against the high unemployment rate among lawyers.

Put America to work.

Not that something will be created.

But it makes people busy.

Fandongo
Jan 12, 2012, 02:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I lived in a suburb of Rochester (where kodak is) in the mid 90s. Such a huge percentage of the area population worked there you almost certainly knew more than one person who did.

Maybe it'll turn into Flint :D
But it's not like cars started using anti-fuel.

Camera - Film = massive waste reduction.

Like a Boeing 747 that runs on rainbows.
Or peeing in a Brita.

Failure to realize that, or at least harbor an underground committee prepared to wage war on the digital battlefront once it finally began to compete with film (particularly in dynamic range), is overtly stupid.

Great business practice, don't get me wrong. Kings of the film world, truly.

If nobody knows film better than you, how do you not infuse much of that knowledge into the digital world??

Canon/Zeiss/Nikon/Pansonic all interpret color intensities and contrast differently.

Technicolor worked with Canon and released their picture profile to greatly reduce the punch that causes increased artifacts and loss of black information...FOR FREE. Don't know why they would approve something that could very well mean their undoing, but I love them for it.

If Kodak approached a similar route and licensed their "look" (through S-Log-like software) to cam companies of their choosing, they'd leach digital profits whilst stubbornly dragging their heals with attempts to flaccidly filibuster fools into spending half a million dollars (or 500 gh2's) to shoot 35mm.

It's silly.

And Canon/Nikon/Sony/Samsung/Sigma/etc/etc are laughing... All the way to the bank.

kdarling
Jan 12, 2012, 06:53 AM
Both Apple and Kodak have patents that are now considered questionable, so the question is why are they using them in lawsuits? It's an interesting contrast:

Kodak is in dire straits and needs to extract any value they can from their patents. Therefore they're willing to license them if they prove valid, as it's too late to actually stop their competition.

Apple is the opposite, the most profitable company around who says they're selling all they can make of their products. They do not need to license their patents, and indeed will not, preferring instead to use and/or sacrifice them as temporary roadblocks to competitors.

Both are legitimate uses of patents.

theelysium
Jan 12, 2012, 05:56 PM
This is a joke.

I don't think they will win these patents to me sound like they fall under that industry standard clause which makes them except able to use...

What's that term again...? :confused:

kdarling
Jan 12, 2012, 06:02 PM
This is a joke.

I don't think they will win these patents to me sound like they fall under that industry standard clause which makes them except able to use...

What's that term again...? :confused:

I think you have a common misconception. There are two possible situations you're probably thinking of:

1) FRAND patents. That's only if they were submitted as part of a standard that is overseen by a standards organization. Doesn't apply here.

2) Antitrust patent misuse. An example would be if you buy up all the patents in a field in order to try to force out other companies. Kodak didn't buy their patents; they invented them.

thekev
Jan 12, 2012, 06:30 PM
#7,453,605
Want to know what is even worse? This was filed for in 2005! Hello, this had been going on for some time. I cannot see this patent being worth anything.


It seems weird to me that any of those you mentioned were filed so late. This was a company that was into digital imaging since the 1980s. They really could have taken a better stance. I recall when the initial 1DS and 22 megapixel backs hit the market (2003 ish). That pretty much pushed it over the edge in publishing.

foiden
Jan 13, 2012, 05:45 AM
But hasn't the capture images to be sent over email something everybody did? Why just sue Apple and HTC? Isn't every single computer/laptop/machine with a camera and the quick and easy ability to turn around and deliver those pictures via email available on practically every OS? You'd think they'd sue just about every OS owner and camera-maker that isn't them. Not that I'd expect such a loose patent be validated given that any one of us, in the position, would move to do the same things because it's common sense industry demands.

nateo200
Jan 13, 2012, 07:09 AM
Kodak is such a sad case. Here is a company that practically invented digital photography, but instead of bringing it to consumers, tried to milk the "film-based photography" for as long as possible. Why? Because they believed their "customers" were the drug stores that ran the film developing and they knew that digital photography would upset their best "customers".

Instead Kodak did nothing in digital for years, completely missed the digital revolution, and now is finally coming across some patents they owned from way back when which they never asserted and trying to go after companies that were actually smart enough to come up with the same things on their own.

Many of their patents fall in the "obvious" realm and simply need to be challenged and invalidated. The rest of their patents should be purchased and donated to the public domain. Let Kodak go out of business and pay off whatever they can to their creditors.

Once great company now produces next to nothing and becomes a patent troll -- so sad.

Just as I was thinking of this I saw this beautiful post...sad but true. How could they simply let Arri, Canon, and RED (a brand new company for christ sake!) walk all over them! Arri made film cameras for a long time and everyone looked at them like Panavision "They will always be true to film", but Arri was smart and started moving to digital (Panavision was late with their genesis) and will undoubtedly stay afloat offering things like their digital film cameras shooting in Apple ProRes natively and making accessories for Canon, Panavision and others. Kodak just sat around and got crapped on by EVERYONE. Christ did they just sit around all those years and make disposable film for drug stores? :O

PracticalMac
Jan 16, 2012, 10:36 AM
Lawyers going to make a MINT!

Either way, Kodak holds key patents, and they will go after anyone and extracts a KINGS RANSOM for them.

Kodak is desperate, its board will pull every dirty trick to get money, and it will only make it more then likely someone will buy them out.

It is FAR, FAR cheaper to buy a nearly bankrupt company like Kodak then haggle over license fees.

Considering Kodak's power in commercial media, it may be a good fit for Apple's graphic dominance.... Or just dismantle it.

PS:
http://www.investorplace.com/2012/01/proof-kodak-was-doomed-14-years-ago/

PracticalMac
Aug 1, 2012, 09:13 PM
Lawyers going to make a MINT!

Either way, Kodak holds key patents, and they will go after anyone and extracts a KINGS RANSOM for them.

Kodak is desperate, its board will pull every dirty trick to get money, and it will only make it more then likely someone will buy them out.

It is FAR, FAR cheaper to buy a nearly bankrupt company like Kodak then haggle over license fees.

Considering Kodak's power in commercial media, it may be a good fit for Apple's graphic dominance.... Or just dismantle it.

PS:
http://www.investorplace.com/2012/01/proof-kodak-was-doomed-14-years-ago/

Seems like gonna happen, more or less.

Apple and Google Lead Separate Groups in Bidding for Kodak Patents (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1412871)

rogerbarrett
Aug 2, 2012, 04:09 AM
Oh too many cases between top companies... :(