Kodak’s press release, verbatim:
Eastman Kodak Company announced today 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.
“Kodak has a long history of digital imaging innovation and we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars creating our industry-leading patent portfolio,” said Laura G. Quatela, Chief Intellectual Property Officer, and Vice President, Eastman Kodak Company. “In the case of Apple and RIM, 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. In light of that, we are taking this action to ensure that we protect the interests of our shareholders and the existing licensees of our technology.
“Our primary interest is not to disrupt the availability of any product but to obtain fair compensation for the use of our technology,” Quatela said. “There’s a basic issue of fairness that needs to be addressed. Those devices use Kodak technology, and we are merely seeking compensation for the use of our technology in their products.”
Kodak has licensed digital imaging technology to approximately 30 companies, including such leading mobile-device companies as LG, Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, and Sony Ericsson, all of which are royalty bearing to Kodak.
On Dec. 17, in an action involving Samsung and Kodak, an ITC Administrative Law Judge issued a ruling declaring that the Kodak patent covering color image preview (No. 6,292,218) was valid and enforceable, and that Samsung’s camera-enabled mobile devices infringed upon that Kodak patent.
In the complaint against Apple and RIM, Kodak is seeking from the ITC a limited exclusion order preventing the importation of infringing devices, including certain mobile telephones and wireless communication devices featuring digital cameras.
In the first suit against Apple in U.S. District Court, Kodak alleges infringement of two patents generally covering image preview and the processing of images of different resolutions. In the second suit, Kodak alleges infringement of patents that describe a method by which a computer program can “ask for help” from another application to carry out certain computer-oriented functions. The allegations in the second suit apply to any Apple product that uses the processing method described above. The patents at issue in the second suit were previously the subject of litigation between Kodak and Sun Microsystems Inc., and in that case, a federal jury determined in a 2004 trial that Sun’s Java programming technology had infringed the patents. Kodak later settled the suit by agreeing to a payment from Sun in return for a license for the patents at issue.
In both District Court actions against Apple, Kodak is seeking to permanently enjoin Apple from further infringement as well as unspecified damages.
“We remain open to negotiating a fair and amicable agreement with both Apple and RIM, which has always been our preference and our practice with other licensees,” Quatela said. “We seek to avoid litigation in our licensing programs whenever possible. But when the infringement is persistent, we will act to defend the interests of our shareholders and licensees, and to promote the fair compensation that is the bedrock of innovation.”
Source: Eastman Kodak Company
Disappointing in that Apple wont pay for using Kodak’s technology.
At least Kodak has the wherewithal to file the claims in Western New York (where they’re located) instead of the Rocket Docket that is somewhere in Texas . . .
If the allegations are true, then pay up Apple. If not, then no harm no foul.
Just as Apple would expect to be compensated for their patents, so should others
Didn’t Apple develop digital photography? Sound like Kodak is pulling a Nokia as their business is collapsing around them.
At least they’re open about it.
Unlike nokia …
Jeeve, you’re an asshat. Go troll at Microshit’s website.
Why am I an “asshat”? Kodak one their lawsuit against Samsung and I expect them to win against Apple. Kodak does not have a history of filing frivolous lawsuits.
Sorry, Kodak WON their lawsuit against Samsung.
@x, I think you should look in the mirror. Show a little professionalism.
@Jeeve, I like your misdirected zeal….
Apple has plenty of patents and lawyers to handle this.
Counter-Suit and shut them up.
RIM might have a little problem,Thats a good thing.
” Kodak does not have a history of filing frivolous lawsuits.”
They DO have a recent history of losing marketshare with their products.
Some time back, I talked to a Kodak engineer, who pointed out the company was firing the technicians and keeping the sales staff. This was shortly before digital photography took off and Kodak went into a tailspin. Another example of Jobs’ observation about it being important who runs a company.
I think the trumps Kodak.
FIRST U.S. ELECTRONIC PHOTOGRAPHY SYSTEM PATENT – 1972. Texas Instruments patented a film-less electronic camera. Inventor: Willis A. Adcock; (Dallas, TX). Assignee:
Texas Instruments Incorporated (Dallas, TX). Filed: June 27, 1972 and again on October 29, 1976 and June 23, 1977. Abstract : “A completely electronic system for recording and subsequently displaying still life pictures includes an optical-electronic transducer for generating electronic signals responsive to an optical image. The signals are stored and subsequently applied to a visual display. Means are provided for applying the signals at a scan rate synchronized with the scan rate of the display to effect a stationary display of the optical image. Preferably, the display is a conventional television set.”
Can’t compete? Litigate.
What’s Kodak worth? Maybe Apple should just buy them, and collect all of their royalties too.
I would think displaying a jpeg image on a screen is a common function that isn’t patentable. Sounds like another bogus lawsuit to blackmail companies into paying up.
@ Jeeve Stobs,
“Why am I an “asshat”? Kodak one their lawsuit against Samsung and I expect them to win against Apple. Kodak does not have a history of filing frivolous lawsuits.”
No, Kodak has a history of losing sales of hardware and I believe I heard that they are basically quitting the market place for camera film and they sold their building to raise money.
They were FORCED into the digital camera market cause they were not forward thinking. So now suddenly they are technology leaders???
Sorry, I cry another goofy patent that does not really patent anything except for stuff already in place.
Just a thought,
en
Kodak was very late to the digital photography game. Years ago, I forget how many, I had a conversation with a ranking engineer at Kodak, and I asked about management’s strategy for the coming digital photography revolution. He said they had none and were hoping if they ignored it, it might go away.
Time for Apple to buy Kodak and shut them up!
These are minor patents, worth very little, and the remedy, “Kodak is seeking from the ITC a limited exclusion order preventing the importation of infringing devices” seems rather extreme.
So kodak has to patent to view a compressed version of a picture, I have an idea, how about no.
If Kodak have been negotiating with Apple for years and getting no joy then Apple clearly think the claim has no basis. This will go to court or they will settle.
I very much doubt Apple will buy Kodak since they have nothing to offer. The digital skill set is not there. Apple lead the market in image handling for still and video.
It is a shame that Kodak failed to take advantage of the digital revolution. They obviously thought they could milk the film market for a few more years and missed the boat.
In many ways this parallels M$. Their dominant position in enterprise means they have lost their motivation to innovate (if they ever did).
Lets all pool our money and buy Kodak.
Then we can get all the royalties from every company who has sent a jpeg to anyone.
I got about $12.60 just burning a hole in my pocket.
Dear Kodak: Where’s my GPS Camera!?!?
US Patent 6313824 – Image preview system makes no mention of Kodak. And for that matter the Joint Photographic Experts Group is er, a group, made up of various trade bodies and entities.
I’m not sure where Kodak fits into either of those.
I may be mistaken but I think the Apple QuickTake cameras were Kodak products.
Didn’t Apple have a digital camera on the market long before Kodak? I’m sure I bought one for my school back in the middle ’90s.
From Wikipedia:
“The Apple QuickTake (codenamed Venus, Mars, Neptune) was one of the first consumer digital camera lines.[1] It was launched in 1994 by Apple Computer and was marketed for three years before being discontinued in 1997. Three models of the product were built including the 100 and 150, both built by Kodak; and the 200, built by Fujifilm.”
They must have had a deal for the technology back then!
@Jeeve Stobs
These patents seem pretty obvious to me, which is why Kodak deserves this scorn. When companies have real innovation that Apple wants to use, they are pretty good about acquiring the rights to that ip whether it be licensing or just purchasing the company outright.
Basing your anti Apple rant around some pretty weak patents doesn’t seem very wise.
@ed,
Jeeve Stobs’ “anti Apple rant???” Relax. Jeeve made one small comment then responded when called an “asshat”. I see no “Rant.” I’m as fanboy as the rest, but I’d hate to not be able to question Apple at all without being berated for no good reason.
A court agreed with Kodak against Samsung, and Kodak has a strong patent portfolio. I’d let this play out in the courts where it belongs, and cut some people a break here.
Go pick on ZuneTang…. He’s up for it.
This from Kodak, who infringed so greatly on Polaroid’s patents in the 80s?
@ ed
Patents weak enough to defeat Samsung, eh?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Thanks T-bone. I owe you a beer.
Sounds like Apple has an earlier patent that may supersede Kodak’s patent. The other companies didn’t, that’s why they paid.
Just a guess. Apple usually knows what they are doing in cases like this.
Kodak also defeated Sun Microsystems in patent case over this issue so Apple may be in big trouble.
@jeeve
‘One One’ was a racehorse. ‘Two Two’ was one too. ‘One One’ won a race. ‘Two Two’ won one too.
Yet another loser — looking for a few more bucks before going under!
Having worked in the photo industry for over 10 years I think I can confidently say: “While most of Kodak`s traditional film/paper products were good quality offering, the same cannot be said of their electronics. So yes, they must be hurting in these days of digital photography. And like any hurting animal that is cornered, they will lash out !
Oh, and AGAIN…. Why has it taken until NOW for Kodak to realize this supposed infringment exsisted ?
“Kodak alleges infringement of patents that describe a method by which a computer program can “ask for help” from another application to carry out certain computer-oriented functions.”
Apple was using this long before the Kodak idiots even went digital.
It’s an absolute zoo out there.