Apple and Google Lead Separate Groups in Bidding for Kodak Patents

[MacRumors]

Google and Apple are once again going head to head in bidding for a major collection of patents owned by a bankrupt corporation. According to The Wall Street Journal, two consortiums have formed to bid for the patents owned by camera giant Kodak, which is currently in bankruptcy.

Apple, Microsoft, and patent-aggregation firm Intellectual Ventures are teaming up, while Google, Samsung, LG, HTC and RPX Corp are forming the second alliance.

The people familiar with the discussions cautioned that work on bids could continue over the weekend, with alliances changing and other bidders potentially emerging.

[...]

A bankruptcy court supervised auction of Kodak's patents is set for Aug. 8. The patents are being sold in two lots: the digital-capture portfolio related to capturing and processing images on cameras, smartphones and tablets; and the Kodak Imaging Systems and Services patents related to storing and analyzing images, among other things.

The two teams are unsurprising. A consortium consisting of Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, RIM, and Sony purchased 6,000 patents from Nortel last year, beating out a group that included Intel and Google. For the Kodak patents, we see Google paired up with Samsung, LG and HTC -- three major Android handset makers -- along with RPX Corp., another patent aggregation firm.

Apple and Kodak have filed a number of lawsuits and countersuits against each other in the ongoing tech patent wars.

Article Link: Apple and Google Lead Separate Groups in Bidding for Kodak Patents

[Oletros]

Another bid war :P

[IzzyJG99]

Interesting. I cannot imagine Kodak having many patents that are relevant in this digital age. Maybe photo printing methods and stuff like that? Weird, but interesting.

[chrmjenkins]

Apple and Microsoft have the deepest pockets, so if they want them that bad, they'll get them. Apple also doesn't perceive WP7/8 as a major threat to its business either, so their teaming up makes sense.

Originally Posted by IzzyJG99

Interesting. I cannot imagine Kodak having many patents that are relevant in this digital age. Maybe photo printing methods and stuff like that? Weird, but interesting.

Reading is your friend.

Apple and Kodak have filed a number of lawsuits and countersuits against each other in the ongoing tech patent wars.

[wickerman1893]

Apple vs. Google vs. Microsoft

Let the battle begin.

[rei101]

An Olympic wrestling match.

[HiRez]

All Apple has to do is bid one dollar over Avogadro's Number. Done.

This is great news for Kodak, they will probably end up getting an obscene amount of money for the patents with the bidding war and at least pay off their creditors.

[Lochias]

Originally Posted by wickerman1893

Apple vs. Google vs. Microsoft

Let the battle begin.

Except that there are two sides, not three. Apple/Microsoft v. Google/Android.

[SPUY767]

Seems like Goog trying to buddy up with its Android OEMs could have antitrust implications. Google needs a cudgel to use against Apple, they will pay dearly for these. We all know, however, that no one's pockets are deeper than Apple's.

[chrmjenkins]

Originally Posted by SPUY767

Seems like Goog trying to buddy up with its Android OEMs could have antitrust implications. Google needs a cudgel to use against Apple, they will pay dearly for these. We all know, however, that no one's pockets are deeper than Apple's.

Apple also won't pay an unreasonable price for the patents. They did, after all, pass on Palm when you know all they would have done is absorb their patents, keep their best engineers and kill their entire product lines.

[wickerman1893]

Originally Posted by Lochias

Except that there are two sides, not three. Apple/Microsoft v. Google/Android.

With the Surface and Windows 8 coming out. I'd say it's a 3 way battle. However, I do get what you're saying and why you would think that.

[Swordylove]

Apple and Microsoft!

[bushido]

just shows how pathatic software patents are. nothing to do with protecting your invention

[Rocketman]

Linked article blocked by paywall. Is there a link to any other media outlet at all with a discussion of the issues which are public?

One wonders if they might actually be best to buy the entirety of Kodak and keep some of its divisions operating?

I suspect the patent bidding will several times exceed the entire market value of Kodak. $74.76 million!

http://investing.money.msn.com/inves.../?symbol=EKDKQ

Apple used to have good relations with Kodak and could reinvigorate some of its aspects and we all remember the Kodak photo spots all around Disneyland (s). I suspect they are Fuji now or some such.

Rocketman

[Peace]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

Linked article blocked by paywall. Is there a link to any other media outlet at all with a discussion of the issues which are public?

One wonders if they might actually be best to buy the entirety of Kodak and keep some of its divisions operating?

I suspect the patent bidding will several times exceed the entire market value of Kodak. $74.76 million!

http://investing.money.msn.com/inves.../?symbol=EKDKQ

Apple used to have good relations with Kodak and could reinvigorate some of its aspects and we all remember the Kodak photo spots all around Disneyland (s). I suspect they are Fuji now or some such.

Rocketman

They not only had a good relationship but Apple also helped Kodak create these patents. that's what the Apple v. Kodak lawsuit is all about.

I suspect if Apple wins it's lawsuit and google wins the bid google is gonna owe Apple a lot of money.

[MCP-511]

I guess the phrase "kodak moment" should be retired.

[Oletros]

Originally Posted by Peace

I suspect if Apple wins it's lawsuit and google wins the bid google is gonna owe Apple a lot of money.

Why?

[codefuns]

Why patent can be transferred? I think a patent should only protected its inventor, if the inventor (a person or company) broken or died, or doesn't use its patent to make profit or benefit human in a limit period, this patent should expired.
A lot of patents is very simple, funny simple, it is unfair for young people, and it will greatly prevent innovation.

[Adey]

Here's an idea: why don't all eight of the firms team up, thereby getting use of the patents for 1/8th the price, blocking out patent trolls (who probably couldn't afford them anyway, to be fair) and save themselves millions down the line by not having to constantly sue each other.

None of the eight have developed the technologies on offer, so I think they're probably more concerned with ongoing use of the patents than protecting them and having exclusive use.

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by wickerman1893

Apple vs. Google vs. Microsoft

Let the battle begin.

You didn't quite read the article. Apple and Microsoft together vs. Google, Samsung and others.

Originally Posted by chrmjenkins

Apple also won't pay an unreasonable price for the patents. They did, after all, pass on Palm when you know all they would have done is absorb their patents, keep their best engineers and kill their entire product lines.

If I remember correctly, Palm's entire product lines were killed without any Apple involvement, and their best engineers are probably available to hire right now. That said, buying a company to kill it off must be about the most stupid use of money imaginable.

[Peace]

Originally Posted by Oletros

Why?

You need to read up on the lawsuit between Apple and Kodak to understand why.

[mingoglia]

Every time I see these threads about patent wars I think to myself how life could be different if patent wars existed years ago. For example, right now every can of cola/energy drinks is basically the same. The mechanism to open the can is identical. What if years ago there was a patent on a "aluminum can opening device"? We may have a half dozen different ways to open a can?

What about patenting a door as a "means to get out of a room that has 4 walls and no opening"?

How about patenting an automobile as having exactly 4 wheels? Or patenting a round steering wheel? How about the order in which the pedals are on the floor (clutch, brake, gas)? Could we be driving around in cars where the brake and gas are on different sides because having them in the same order would have infringed on a patent?

Yes, crazy stuff like this goes through my head, but at the end of the day I still believe the consumer is the one that potentially loses.

[lzyprson]

Originally Posted by Adey

Here's an idea: why don't all eight of the firms team up, thereby getting use of the patents for 1/8th the price, blocking out patent trolls (who probably couldn't afford them anyway, to be fair) and save themselves millions down the line by not having to constantly sue each other.

None of the eight have developed the technologies on offer, so I think they're probably more concerned with ongoing use of the patents than protecting them and having exclusive use.

Because this defeats the purpose of Apple wanting to turn Google back into a search & email provider.

[chrmjenkins]

Originally Posted by gnasher729

If I remember correctly, Palm's entire product lines were killed without any Apple involvement, and their best engineers are probably available to hire right now. That said, buying a company to kill it off must be about the most stupid use of money imaginable.

Actually, Apple has already hired at least one of them. They nabbed a top UI engineer from them.

They wouldn't have bought it to kill it solely. That would have just been a necessary consequence of buying it for the patents to hold over their competitors' heads.

Originally Posted by mingoglia

Every time I see these threads about patent wars I think to myself how life could be different if patent wars existed years ago. For example, right now every can of cola/energy drinks is basically the same. The mechanism to open the can is identical. What if years ago there was a patent on a "aluminum can opening device"? We may have a half dozen different ways to open a can?

What about patenting a door as a "means to get out of a room that has 4 walls and no opening"?

How about patenting an automobile as having exactly 4 wheels? Or patenting a round steering wheel? How about the order in which the pedals are on the floor (clutch, brake, gas)? Could we be driving around in cars where the brake and gas are on different sides because having them in the same order would have infringed on a patent?

Yes, crazy stuff like this goes through my head, but at the end of the day I still believe the consumer is the one that potentially loses.

You do realize that many basic inventions like these were patented and have since lapsed? Like the spray shaving cream can- that was patented. There are dozens of such examples.

The problem with software patents is that a lot of rudimentary ideas, many of which were already in use, are being patented. This would be like if you introduced patents back in cave man days. Physical implementations of ideas are thousands of years old, but software, an abstract implementation, is only around 60 years old.

[Windlasher]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

Linked article blocked by paywall. Is there a link to any other media outlet at all with a discussion of the issues which are public?

One wonders if they might actually be best to buy the entirety of Kodak and keep some of its divisions operating?

I suspect the patent bidding will several times exceed the entire market value of Kodak. $74.76 million!

http://investing.money.msn.com/inves.../?symbol=EKDKQ

Apple used to have good relations with Kodak and could reinvigorate some of its aspects and we all remember the Kodak photo spots all around Disneyland (s). I suspect they are Fuji now or some such.

Rocketman

Would love for apple to keep the printing industry running "rebranded" kodaks entry level printers are actually quite nice and the ink is cheap.