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 Patent Infringement Suits Against Apple, Research in Motion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm curious, what would be your ( honest!! ) opinion if Apple lost the Kodak patent case?
Apple patents are smoke&mirrors mostly...
Sure, Apple patented iPhone, but what exactly are those patents considering that 99% of the components and technology used in iPhone were developed outside of Apple. Well majority of the patents are on top of other parties patents. Sure it gives impression of Apple have lets say a hold on some touch patents, but what are these patents worse if by merely putting a finger on the touch screen would violate dozen of other patents. So basically Apple could not use their own patent without infringement of other patents.
Term customary has different definition when it applied to Apple. Other 30 companies paid fees, but it is too high for Apple, because of Apple is special when it comes to stealing others IP?
I think, Apple may end up paying 50% of iPhone/iPod revenue to cover licenses for technologies it did not contributed a penny to develop. Apple folks know what is at stake, but it is imminent, more lawsuits are coming... Even with these hefty fees it should be a good product for Apple.
Want to bet who is next?
I bet - Qualcomm will be next...
Sure, Apple patented iPhone, but what exactly are those patents considering that 99% of the components and technology used in iPhone were developed outside of Apple. Well majority of the patents are on top of other parties patents. Sure it gives impression of Apple have lets say a hold on some touch patents, but what are these patents worse if by merely putting a finger on the touch screen would violate dozen of other patents. So basically Apple could not use their own patent without infringement of other patents.
Term customary has different definition when it applied to Apple. Other 30 companies paid fees, but it is too high for Apple, because of Apple is special when it comes to stealing others IP?
I think, Apple may end up paying 50% of iPhone/iPod revenue to cover licenses for technologies it did not contributed a penny to develop. Apple folks know what is at stake, but it is imminent, more lawsuits are coming... Even with these hefty fees it should be a good product for Apple.
Want to bet who is next?
I bet - Qualcomm will be next...
Thank you for your response
Hey, no worries.
Wrongdoing is wrongdoing. After all, Apple is still a corporation operating in a cutthroat environment, not a saint.
If this article is correct, i'll take back what I said about assuming Kodak had been talking to Apple.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10620348
"We've had discussions for years with both companies in an attempt to resolve this issue amicably, and we have not been able to reach a satisfactory agreement," said Laura Quatela, Kodak's chief intellectual property officer.
Does this mean that both Apple and RIM believe that their own patents cover
said technology?
I think it's safe to assume that when it comes to patents, Apple has all their ducks in a row. Apple knows legal battles like a fish knows water. And as for a halt in iPhone sales or some sort of injunction against Apple, dream on.
So, how exactly should Kodak then handle this case so you and others would be happy?
It seems to me that people are claiming that Kodaks patents are not valid because courts have not said that they are valid. But.... they are suing just to that effect. And when they do so, people whine? But if they don't sue, it means that no court has proven that their patents are valid, and again people whine.
Is this circular logic or what? No matter what Kodak does, it's somehow wrong? The only acceptable thing they could do, is to shut up and do nothing? But what if Apple really was infringing on their patents? Doesn't the fact that Kodak is willing to go to court give their case some credibility? Nokia is different in that regard that Apple is hurting them, and they want to damage Apple any way they could. But Kodak and Apple are not competitors, so Kodak has no interest in harming Apple.
How about giving Kodak the benefit of the doubt? If we compare this to the Nokia-case, there are some clear differences. For starters, Nokia and Apple are direct competitors, and Apple is whipping Nokia. But Kodak and Apple are NOT competitors. It just happens that their products share some technology.
I'm surprised Kodak has the money to pay for Legal fees. I never see their cameras apart from... behind a glass screen.
Wait, if the DC was made in 1985 doesn't that mean the related patents are now public domain?
Wait, if the DC was made in 1985 doesn't that mean the related patents are now public domain?
Hey, no worries.
Wrongdoing is wrongdoing. After all, Apple is still a corporation operating in a cutthroat environment, not a saint.
Appreciate your honesty in this statement.
Not really. Apple is very good at keeping things quiet, buying competitors or technology they wish to use, and settling out of court for most things that come up.
IIRC Kodak just received and Oscar and an award as CES last year.
Going back to my 'Apple Zealots' comment, heres where it holds true to an awesome degree:
Creative sues Apple, and the Apple Zealots go into a fit of rage:
Link:
https://www.macrumors.com/2006/05/15/creative-sues-apple-seeks-injunction/
Apple then counter-sues Creative, and the Apple Zealots rejoice:
Link: https://www.macrumors.com/2006/05/19/creative-lawsuit-update-apple-sues-creative/
Creative sues Apple, and the Apple Zealots go into a fit of rage:
Link:
https://www.macrumors.com/2006/05/15/creative-sues-apple-seeks-injunction/
Apple then counter-sues Creative, and the Apple Zealots rejoice:
Link: https://www.macrumors.com/2006/05/19/creative-lawsuit-update-apple-sues-creative/
Looks pretty typical.
They had a drop in 2001 and remained fairly consistent up until the whole economy tanked in mid 2008.
And looky there... they even paid out dividends to their investors.
Someone should put a fork in them for sure.
Yeah, clicking that "positive" or "negative" button is too scary even to watch.
I don't think your paralegal will have any luck...
This is an ITC filing (which says to me that Kodak doesn't have a very good case at all, because if they did they'd take it to the court system and fight in a more proper forum). ITC is potentially very high reward, because if they win they can hold Apple hostage - as in, "give us our money or you can't import your products" - and there's much less in the way of pesky appeals and so forth to deal with.
The ITC docket number is 2706, and it has not yet been officially instituted (still listed as pending); it was filed on 1/14/10, and reads:
...requesting that the Commission conduct an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended regarding Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof . The proposed respondents are: Research In Motion, Ltd., Ontario, Canada; Research In Motion Corporation, Irving, Texas; and Apple, Inc., Cupertino, California.
This is an ITC filing (which says to me that Kodak doesn't have a very good case at all, because if they did they'd take it to the court system and fight in a more proper forum). ITC is potentially very high reward, because if they win they can hold Apple hostage - as in, "give us our money or you can't import your products" - and there's much less in the way of pesky appeals and so forth to deal with.
The ITC docket number is 2706, and it has not yet been officially instituted (still listed as pending); it was filed on 1/14/10, and reads:
...requesting that the Commission conduct an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended regarding Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof . The proposed respondents are: Research In Motion, Ltd., Ontario, Canada; Research In Motion Corporation, Irving, Texas; and Apple, Inc., Cupertino, California.
We want shots boys!
Isn't the Kodak thing about displaying the photon on the screen as a preview before the photo is taken... you know when you're panning around looking for the shot... All cam-phones do it...
Isn't the Kodak thing about displaying the photon on the screen as a preview before the photo is taken... you know when you're panning around looking for the shot... All cam-phones do it...
Yes, they did also file the case with the courts too.
I was just going to say that. Haven't found the complaint yet. Should be available shortly.
I don't have any experience in WDNY, and never heard of a patent case there, in fact, so it will be interesting to see how the case progresses there.
That is what their ITC case against Samsung was about, but it's not clear if that patent is involved in the Apple matter.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.6; en-us; Archos5 Build/Donut) AppleWebKit/528.5+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Mobile Safari/525.20.1)
According fo the article, 30 companies already have licencing deals with Kodak regarding the patent.
As they pay Kodak already, they can use it.
This isn't some vendetta against Apple.
Thex1138 said:
According fo the article, 30 companies already have licencing deals with Kodak regarding the patent.
As they pay Kodak already, they can use it.
This isn't some vendetta against Apple.
Kodak
I worked for this bureaucratic, directionless sloth of a company. Management is killing it, and causing them to seek cheap-shot revenue. FAIL.
I worked for this bureaucratic, directionless sloth of a company. Management is killing it, and causing them to seek cheap-shot revenue. FAIL.
Man, I hate when Canadian locations are quoted as "province, Canada" but U.S. ones are "city, state". As if Canada is so small, provinces are equivalent to U.S. cities. Ontario is 2.5x bigger than California!