<irony>
Apple is copycat. almost all idea get from Nokia and from Kodak
</irony>
No court has ruled on any of these cases.
<irony>
Apple is copycat. almost all idea get from Nokia and from Kodak
</irony>
No court has ruled on any of these cases.
I'm curious, what would be your ( honest!! ) opinion if Apple lost the Kodak patent case?
This, and the Nokia case is making me wonder about the reason for the "Boy have we patented it" comment from Mr J.
Were they consciously aware that they were voilating patents - people, especially people in such a position, don't just make comments for no reason.
I'm curious, what would be your ( honest!! ) opinion if Apple lost the Kodak patent case?
The only opinion anyone could have. They were violating Kodak's IP.
Thank you for your response![]()
You are assuming that Kodak has been talking to Apple? Pretty big assumption!
Oh your wrong BTW, I'm simply against any company that no longer innovates in favour of "Bringing in the lawyers".
News for me. Sure I don't agree with everything Apple does, and certianly don't agree with apple's mobile strategy. Apple's PC line is great, however.
That does not make me a troll, and certainly not a fan boy!!!!
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...
Looks like you didn't like being called a Fanboy and a Troll anymore that I did!![]()
The only opinion anyone could have. They were violating Kodak's IP.
Hey, no worries.
Wrongdoing is wrongdoing. After all, Apple is still a corporation operating in a cutthroat environment, not a saint.![]()
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?
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.
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:
So, how exactly should Kodak then handle this case so you and others would be happy?
When I get some free time I'll have a paralegal pull up the complaint. They have to be disclosed in the complaint, which is public record.
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.
From Reuters...
Eastman Kodak Company Alleges Patent Infringement By Apple Inc. And Research In Motion Limited
9:32am EST
Eastman Kodak Company announced that it has filed lawsuits against Apple Inc. and Research In Motion Limited (RIM) alleging the infringement of Kodak digital imaging technology. The Kodak complaint, filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), specifically claims that Apple`s iPhones and RIM`s camera-enabled BlackBerry devices infringe a Kodak patent that covers technology related to a method for previewing images. Separately, Kodak filed two suits today against Apple in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York that claim the infringement of patents related to digital cameras and certain computer processes.
Yes, they did also file the case with the courts too.![]()
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...
Thex1138 said: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...
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!The proposed respondents are: Research In Motion, Ltd., Ontario, Canada; Research In Motion Corporation, Irving, Texas; and Apple, Inc., Cupertino, California.