Kodak says patent dispute with Apple worth more than $1B in royalties

Kodak says patent dispute with Apple worth more than $1B in royalties
AppleInsider | Kodak says patent dispute with Apple worth more than $1B in royalties

The CEO of Eastman Kodak told reporters Thursday that his company could receive more than $1 billion in royalty revenue if it can achieve a victory against Apple and Research in Motion in a patent dispute over digital camera technology used in the two companies' mobile devices.

Click to expand...

Very interesting, I didn't realise that Kodak were even in battle with Apple till now. Would be interesting to know exactly what Kodak think Apple and RIM are infringing on, much do some research.

- Simon

Interesting. This is probably the only way Kodak will turn a profit this year - talk about not reading the tea-leaves. I wonder how much longer Kodak will exist. It'll be a shame to see them go. IP attorneys are making a lot of $$ these days.

I still load 35mm kodak film every job I do that isn't digital. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

whitehorse84 said:

I still load 35mm kodak film every job I do that isn't digital. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

Click to expand...

I hope you're right - but I think you're probably in the minority. I know the last time I was in London - a large part of the Kodak factory there looked pretty idle. I wouldn't be surprised to see them eventually be absorbed by someone - but who knows. Maybe they can reinvent themselves. Companies have been known to do that successfully - ;D

whitehorse84 said:

I still load 35mm kodak film every job I do that isn't digital. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

Click to expand...

I tend to disagree. I work in advertising, and so I'm professionally involved with a lot of photographers, and I can't even remember the last time I saw film of any kind. Also my wife has been studying photography for the past year, and has had zero exposure to film during that time.

I think it's pretty safe to say that film, if it's not in its death throes, has become an extremely niche market.

Shikarnov said:

I think it's pretty safe to say that film, if it's not in its death throes, has become an extremely niche market.

Click to expand...

I hope it remains a niche market, its important to keep some of those old skills going, like darkroom skills and exposure and light metering. You never know, we may need those old skills again someday

Much like you still see people riding horseback, driving around in cars from the 40s, reenacting Civil War battles with authentic gear, I'm sure film will remain on life support indefinitely. It'll probably be an expensive hobby, but I'm sure should humanity need it again following some electrical disaster, it'll be there.

Kodak clutching at last straws.

Shikarnov said:

I tend to disagree. I work in advertising, and so I'm professionally involved with a lot of photographers, and I can't even remember the last time I saw film of any kind. Also my wife has been studying photography for the past year, and has had zero exposure to film during that time.

I think it's pretty safe to say that film, if it's not in its death throes, has become an extremely niche market.

Click to expand...

well I tend to disagree with this..

I'm not talking about photography, well I am, but not really. When not working with digital (I'm a local 600 DIT) I will also load on a few jobs. A LOT of films ARE still shot on 35mm or 70mm film (IMAX).. it's not all digital. ****, I had a buddy that worked on Black Swan and they shot that on S16MM film.. film will ALWAYS be around in this industry because not everyone is into the digital craze.

I make more money when we shoot digital, so personally... I like digital.

Well, calling digital a "craze" is probably a kin to saddle-makers in the late 19th century dismissing the horseless carriage. Sure, there are still uses for film, but in time, digital is going to nullify the few remaining advantages film continues to enjoy. Truly I'll be shocked if we could attach some kind of reminder to revisit this thread in, say, 25 years, and film as a professional tool is anything but extinct.

Most pro photographers use film and digital.

Never thought I see the demise of Kodachrome since slides are the true HD no one knows .http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30film.html

I read this article via TUAW last night. I'm annoyed that Nokia and Kodak are doing everything they can to try and fight apple for creating products that combined and in most cases crushed their products in the marketplace. I don't enough about paten infringement to decide if apple actually broke any laws, but in my opinion these companies are whining like babies because they didn't think of the touchscreen phone first. It has me a little worried though. Apparently Kodak won a similar lawsuit against Samsung and other cell phone manufacturer for copy right infringement because they copied the ability to see a preview of a pic after snapping it, or something like that. The court awarded Kodak 900 million. I hope Kodak doesn't have a case against apple...

It will be a niche market. My ex that has Degree In Advanced Digital Photography still loves nothing more than going out with her 'old' Nikon and then getting the chance to develop them herself. The pleasure she gets out of experimenting is unbelievable.
Then gets disappointed come the working week and back to her Digital camera.
It wont die but a select few will still use Film

Scraping101 said:

I read this article via TUAW last night. I'm annoyed that Nokia and Kodak are doing everything they can to try and fight apple for creating products that combined and in most cases crushed their products in the marketplace. I don't enough about paten infringement to decide if apple actually broke any laws, but in my opinion these companies are whining like babies because they didn't think of the touchscreen phone first. It has me a little worried though. Apparently Kodak won a similar lawsuit against Samsung and other cell phone manufacturer for copy right infringement because they copied the ability to see a preview of a pic after snapping it, or something like that. The court awarded Kodak 900 million. I hope Kodak doesn't have a case against apple...

Click to expand...

Often the most innovative ideas become obvious once they become known. We'd be the first to defend Apple for blazing a trail, and then suing everybody in sight for trying to copy what Apple did. If Kodak really did come up with the idea of previewing images before anybody else thought of it, then they ought to be compensated for that innovation.

What I object to when it comes to patents are those that either never expire, or those that are made simply for licensing purposes or to sue competitors. If you develop a technology, patents are there to ensure that competition can't come and copy what you did before you have a chance to establish yourself and profit from your invention. But it's not supposed to enable you to profit once somebody else invents the same thing and decides to make the investment in bringing it to market that you wouldn't/couldn't.