Corephotonics Sues Apple Again Over Dual-Lens Cameras in iPhone 7 Plus and Later [Updated]

[gavroche]

This is never the case, because it is legally impossible. If the timeline is as you suggest, where Apple develops the tech in secret before someone obtains a patent on it, then Apple's research would be prior art to that patent and it would be invalid. So, no, this can't happen.

Ehem... you are confusing two very different things: Whether someone could do this (win) or whether they could sue you. People can sue you for anything. As if a company has never lost a patent lawsuit before. Or as if a company has never had a patent invalidated before.
[doublepost=1510083568][/doublepost]

First to file gets the patent. It was first to invent but it got changed. From memory this was over 10 years ago.

Patents can be invalidated for a number of reasons. Apple has had patents invalidated before. And that is to say nothing about having two similar but different patents (for slightly different methods of doing something similar). Company A can sue Company B for infringement. The court would then have to decide if both companies have valid Patents, and if the company being sued is infringing on the other companys patent.

 

[purplehaze0]

Christ! These chancers took a long time to initiate this!

 

[oneMadRssn]

Ehem... you are confusing two very different things: Whether someone could do this (win) or whether they could sue you. People can sue you for anything. As if a company has never lost a patent lawsuit before. Or as if a company has never had a patent invalidated before.

If someone brought such a flagrantly frivolous lawsuit, it would probably be dismissed within a few months and there would be a pretty good likelihood of the plaintiff having to pay for defendants' costs.

Even if the facts weren't so bad, and the lawsuit had some merit, then such an easy invalidity case can be won for under $100k.

Source: Am a patent litigator.

 

[scrapesleon]

Trying to stop Apple from being the first trillion dollar company

 

[techwhiz]

Yeah, definitely not a patent troll in this case.

But sorting out the claims will be difficult.
If Apple licensed the technology from Kodak or some other prior art company then it muddies the waters.
These patents are incremental and rely on lots of prior art.
I'm calling BS.

 

[Gasu E.]

First to file gets the patent. It was first to invent but it got changed. From memory this was over 10 years ago.

It was changed only as of 2013, in the USA. And, given how new this law is, it has not really been court-tested.

 

[brianvictor7]

If the allegations are true, this is very disappointing behavior on Apple's part. We'll have to wait for the courts to decide what has happened.

 

[Gasu E.]

Example?

Even if you can give an example, what's your point? In intellectural property laws, the entitity which patents an idea first legally "owns" it. It doesn't matter if another company had the same idea and just didn't patent it, which would never happen at Apple, which is why you won't be able to give an example.

You say that as if it's absolute. In fact, that's been true for less than 4 years. Prior to 2013, it was "first to invent." And the new law has barely been court-tested, so who knows if it will stand up. There's a strong argument that it goes against the "original intent" of Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution.

 

[Kabeyun]

You can't arbitrarily sue in East Texas anymore without a presence in East Texas.

Required move.

Are you sure? Go here, scroll down to §6, read paragraphs 6.1.1 (“Finding the proper venue for litigation”) and 6.1.2 (“Evaluating the proper venues”) and confirm you’re still sure. As in patent attorney sure.
[doublepost=1510086910][/doublepost]

Has nothing to do with being brave.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/East-Texas-is-patent-capital-no-more-12218778.php

Interesting but not relevant to the cujones of filing in Northern California, Apple’s home jurisdiction. Your article only shows that they should’ve filed in Delaware instead of Texas.

 

[Fixey]

I can guarantee if you look at the software behind the cameras for merging the images you will find similar software from adobe, and other including open source we need to move away from patents world and moved to creativity world, the patents just hold back progress as it has all gotten out of hand

 

[mikef07]

Are you sure? Go here, scroll down to §6, read paragraphs 6.1.1 (“Finding the proper venue for litigation”) and 6.1.2 (“Evaluating the proper venues”) and confirm you’re still sure. As in patent attorney sure.
[doublepost=1510086910][/doublepost]
Interesting but not relevant to the cujones of filing in Northern California, Apple’s home jurisdiction. Your article only shows that they should’ve filed in Delaware instead of Texas.

It absolutely is relevant. Because the company suing has no US presence it makes sense to file where the defendant is located.A year or two ago and they would have filed in East Texas. The point of that article is you can't shop Districts anymore.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/business/supreme-court-patent-lawsuit.html

Read the bottom.

ETA: The only reason they mention Delaware is because so many companies are incorporare there. I have no idea if Apple does but I doubt it.

https://www.law360.com/articles/895435/patent-litigation-in-us-district-courts-a-2016-review

One more article that talks about California because of technology presence.

 

[lederermc]

The use of two lens in cameras dates back 100 years. It's hard to tell from the article if Apple use is the same as the patent holder use.

 

[MacWorld78]

All I can say is Apple is no longer innovative firm - only Steve jobs can throw so many idea and innovative technology.

 

[Iconoclysm]

MR is enamored with the word "alleged" to the point of comical misuse. Nothing about Mendlovic's experience is "alleged." According to the company web site:

Prof. David Mendlovic holds B.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering from Tel Aviv University followed by a MINERVA post-doc fellowship. He is currently a Tel Aviv University full professor of electro-optics. He has authored more than 200 technical articles and 3 book chapters and is the holder of more than 40 patents, all of which have been commercialized. Prof. Mendlovic is the 1998 winner of the ICO (International Commission of Optics) Award. During the past decade, he led various commercial and business development activities. Two of his patents became worldwide technology standards (fibers for medical internal operations and long range barcode scanners commercialized by Symbol Technologies). He is a founder of successful opto-electronics startup companies, including Civcom and Eyesquad, and served as their CEO. After Eyesquad was acquired by Tessera, he became the General Manager of Tessera Israel and later the General Manager of Tessera’s Image Enhancement Division. Prof. Mendlovic also served a term as the Chief Scientist of the Israeli Ministry of Science.​

You do realize all of this is alleged, right?
[doublepost=1510090386][/doublepost]

"Good artists copy, great artists steal"

Not sure you know what is meant by this comment.

 

[gatearray]

Apple's "lead negotiator" said it "would take years and millions of dollars in litigation" before Apple might owe anything.

Wow, such morals and values. They don't do what the law says, they do what's right, right? Hypocrites.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Wow, such morals and values. They don't do what the law says, they do what's right, right? Hypocrites.

Kills me when people like yourself immediately believe hearsay, second hand no less. But that's confirmation bias for you.

 

[KPandian1]

Prof. David Mendlovic holds B.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering ...

All these credentials mean bollocks, and are irrelevant to the case, unless they are proof that he invented the dual-lens camera system, among other things, relevant in this patent claim.

Oh, but, ... dual lens cameras alone existed from about the time of the first camera!

Guess we have to wait to see the specifics of the claim as provable by lawyers - or Apple buys them in a hostile take-over.

 

[Fixey]

There's nothing new about this concept. When DSLR cameras were low resolution in the early 2000's I'd take a wide shot and then switch lenses and move in closer to take photos I'd eventually stitch together for a larger MP image.

Exactly but the jury and judges have no clue when it comes to technology it is beyond them they have no background programming or experience to understand and it is a shame as most patents are just ludicrous and they get approved and backed up by law, just like the shape of the iPad it is a an old design used the slates used in schools way way back before I was born.

 

[gavroche]

If someone brought such a flagrantly frivolous lawsuit, it would probably be dismissed within a few months and there would be a pretty good likelihood of the plaintiff having to pay for defendants' costs.

Even if the facts weren't so bad, and the lawsuit had some merit, then such an easy invalidity case can be won for under $100k.

Source: Am a patent litigator.

What are you are saying does not go against anything i said. And it does not change the fact that this case appears to be anything but simple... if two different companies had similar patents on similar technology (and Apple acquired one of them)... then this case is not going away in in a few months. And contrary to what others have said, the mere fact that the plaintiff in this case may have a patent with an earlier date than the other company does not = an automatic win (just look at the litigation with Samsung, where Apple had many patents on stuff that should be pretty simple to understand. Has dragged on in court for many years).

 

[Regime2008]

Can you blame me? That was too funny.

Bro, I must say, I love these avatars!

 

[groovyd]

good artists copy, great artists steal

 

[oneMadRssn]

What are you are saying does not go against anything i said. And it does not change the fact that this case appears to be anything but simple... if two different companies had similar patents on similar technology (and Apple acquired one of them)... then this case is not going away in in a few months. And contrary to what others have said, the mere fact that the plaintiff in this case may have a patent with an earlier date than the other company does not = an automatic win (just look at the litigation with Samsung, where Apple had many patents on stuff that should be pretty simple to understand. Has dragged on in court for many years).

Yea, sure. I was responding to the assertion that it is somehow common for Apple to invent a new technology and release it after some time, and have an intervening company patent that technology somewhere in between and prevail in a patent lawsuit. That doesn't happen, and it isn't attempted nearly as much as people on this forum seem to think.

This case seems legitimate at first blush. However, I question the wisdom of using the District Courts for this endeavour. As you said, the Samsung litigation shows just how slow and unproductive that kind of litigation can be. Considering that Corephotonics has some deals in place with Mediatek and Samsung, among others, I would think an ITC play would be much better.

 

[gnasher729]

This is never the case, because it is legally impossible. If the timeline is as you suggest, where Apple develops the tech in secret before someone obtains a patent on it, then Apple's research would be prior art to that patent and it would be invalid. So, no, this can't happen.

It has nothing to do with this case, but if Apple develops anything _in secret_, then it isn't prior art. Apple would either have to apply for a patent first, or publish their results (which loses them the right to get a patent). Only things that are _known_ can be prior art.

 

[IJ Reilly]

All these credentials mean bollocks, and are irrelevant to the case, unless they are proof that he invented the dual-lens camera system, among other things, relevant in this patent claim.

Oh, but, ... dual lens cameras alone existed from about the time of the first camera!

Guess we have to wait to see the specifics of the claim as provable by lawyers - or Apple buys them in a hostile take-over.

The point being, nothing about his credentials are a matter of dispute, therefore, they cannot be alleged. It makes as much sense as saying that Didi Gregorius is allegedly a shortstop for the New York Yankees. Anyway, MR apparently saw this as a mistake and corrected it in the article.

 

[gnasher729]

good artists copy, great artists steal

Nice of you to quote Pablo Picasso, without doubt one of the greatest artist. I am sure you can explain what he meant by "steal". Hint: It's not meant in any literal way.