Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Kodak Files New Patent Infringement Lawsuits Against Apple and HTC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
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."
Bye bye Kodak
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.
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.
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.
Looks like they took a leaf out of Apples book then
Apple makes and sells something, does Kodak make anything anymore or do they just sell their name to other companies to use?
#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.
Kodak
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!
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.
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
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
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.
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...
But hey, the armchair lawyers are good for pop corn entertainment! Maybe they should reconsider their career path...
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.
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.
Maybe it'll turn into Flint
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.
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.
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.
Please
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...?
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...?
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...?
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.