Kodak wins ‘$76m’ in patent dispute with Ricoh ...

**boriscleto** · 10-28-2013, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by Blue

I wonder if this has something to do with the sensor for the 645D.

More likely settlement of the JPEG preview patent. Ricoh had an agreement with Kodak more than ten years ago. Pentax never had an agreement with Kodak. Kodak says Ricoh should have to pay to add Pentax to the agreement. That is all this is about.

Blue · 10-28-2013, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

More likely settlement of the JPEG preview patent. Ricoh had an agreement with Kodak more than ten years ago. Pentax never had an agreement with Kodak. Kodak says Ricoh should have to pay to add Pentax to the agreement. That is all this is about.

What I gather, it had nothing directly to do with Pentax in that context.

Edit: Ricoh also has a lawsuit against Kodak related to patent infringement on printer patents.

http://wirthconsulting.org/2013/04/23/ricoh-sues-kodak-over-printer-patents/

**boriscleto** · 10-28-2013, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Blue

What I gather, it had nothing directly to do with Pentax in that context.

Edit: Ricoh also has a lawsuit against Kodak related to patent infringement on printer patents.

Ricoh Sues Kodak over Printer Patents | Wirth Consulting

From the Roch. D&C

Quote:

Among its claims were that once Ricoh bought camera maker Pentax Imaging Systems in 2011, it owed back royalties since Pentax had never signed any digital imaging licensing agreement with Kodak.

Quote:

Ricoh, for its part, argued that that it had paid Kodak everything owed by the patent license agreement for its own products, and that there’s no proof Pentax ever infringed on Kodak’s patents.

It may not be the JPEG preview patent that Kodak used to extort money from other companies with, until Apple beat them in court, but it's probably something similar.

goldenarrow · 10-28-2013, 05:02 PM

Does anyone know if the Ricoh-Kodak patent dispute was settled or are there on-going royalties for the digital technology? Seems like not just Ricoh would owe Kodak "back payments" for a range of things digital. Sounds similar to all the stuff Xerox invented out of Palo Alto ( the mouse, "windows", etc.) but they managed to come back from the brink unlike Kodak. Reading about lawyers (or, interchangeably, politicians) gives me a headache.....

Last edited by goldenarrow; 10-28-2013 at 05:04 PM. Reason: lawyers

Class A · 10-28-2013, 07:46 PM

This lawsuit is a reason for me to avoid Kodak products / services.

If Kodak has an issue with Pentax regarding a time when Pentax was owned by Hoya, why haven't they been knocking on Hoya's doors?
If the reason is that the current owner is responsible then why aren't the $76m flowing to the current owners of the patents in question (Kodak sold them)?

And how on earth does packaging a DSLR with a kit lens make the DLSR a "self-contained" device?

Yuck.

BTW, this thread could be merged with this one.

yakky · 10-28-2013, 08:10 PM

It's a shame a once innovative company is now a patent troll.

Vylen · 10-28-2013, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by yakky

It's a shame a once innovative company is now a patent troll.

I would definitely not call them a patent troll.

Kozlok · 10-28-2013, 08:39 PM - **1 Like**

A patent is a piece of property like any other. Would you be happy if someone used your property without paying for it? Owning and enforcing ones patents does not make someone a patent troll any more than owning a home and not wanting vagrants sleeping in your living room makes you a home owning troll.

**boriscleto** · 10-29-2013, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by Kozlok

A patent is a piece of property like any other. Would you be happy if someone used your property without paying for it? Owning and enforcing ones patents does not make someone a patent troll any more than owning a home and not wanting vagrants sleeping in your living room makes you a home owning troll.

Unless the patent is invalid...

Apple, RIM win in patent case vs. Kodak affirmed by ITC - Computerworld

Kodak was using the 218-patent to extort money from other companies. Apple & RIM decided they weren't going to pay and took Kodak to court. The ITC Judge found that they were infringing the patent, but that the patent was invalid. That was the end of Kodak's delusion of the patent portfolio being worth a billion dollars...

Blue · 10-29-2013, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by Vylen

I would definitely not call them a patent troll.

As I pointed out above, Ricoh is also suing Kodak for patent infringement on printers.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh/Pentax patent 16-70/4, 18-70/4-6, 25-350/3.5-6 APS-C lenses	hongzhibin1987	Pentax News and Rumors	58	10-15-2013 04:24 AM
New lens ricoh patent for 1/1.7" sensor...	wanderography	Pentax Q	14	11-07-2012 10:42 AM
Ricoh patent: 28mm equiv. lenses - Future of GRD and GXR?	JPT	Pentax News and Rumors	2	07-07-2012 08:04 PM
Impact resistant lens cap patent from Ricoh	LFLee	Pentax News and Rumors	15	05-25-2012 12:53 AM

10-28-2013, 11:39 AM	#16
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Blue I wonder if this has something to do with the sensor for the 645D. More likely settlement of the JPEG preview patent. Ricoh had an agreement with Kodak more than ten years ago. Pentax never had an agreement with Kodak. Kodak says Ricoh should have to pay to add Pentax to the agreement. That is all this is about.

10-28-2013, 11:48 AM	#17
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by boriscleto More likely settlement of the JPEG preview patent. Ricoh had an agreement with Kodak more than ten years ago. Pentax never had an agreement with Kodak. Kodak says Ricoh should have to pay to add Pentax to the agreement. That is all this is about. What I gather, it had nothing directly to do with Pentax in that context. Edit: Ricoh also has a lawsuit against Kodak related to patent infringement on printer patents. http://wirthconsulting.org/2013/04/23/ricoh-sues-kodak-over-printer-patents/

10-28-2013, 12:00 PM	#18
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Blue What I gather, it had nothing directly to do with Pentax in that context. Edit: Ricoh also has a lawsuit against Kodak related to patent infringement on printer patents. Ricoh Sues Kodak over Printer Patents \| Wirth Consulting From the Roch. D&C Quote: Among its claims were that once Ricoh bought camera maker Pentax Imaging Systems in 2011, it owed back royalties since Pentax had never signed any digital imaging licensing agreement with Kodak. Quote: Ricoh, for its part, argued that that it had paid Kodak everything owed by the patent license agreement for its own products, and that there’s no proof Pentax ever infringed on Kodak’s patents. It may not be the JPEG preview patent that Kodak used to extort money from other companies with, until Apple beat them in court, but it's probably something similar.

10-28-2013, 05:02 PM	#19
goldenarrow Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Chicago Suburbs. Photos: Gallery Posts: 501	Does anyone know if the Ricoh-Kodak patent dispute was settled or are there on-going royalties for the digital technology? Seems like not just Ricoh would owe Kodak "back payments" for a range of things digital. Sounds similar to all the stuff Xerox invented out of Palo Alto ( the mouse, "windows", etc.) but they managed to come back from the brink unlike Kodak. Reading about lawyers (or, interchangeably, politicians) gives me a headache..... Last edited by goldenarrow; 10-28-2013 at 05:04 PM. Reason: lawyers

10-28-2013, 07:46 PM	#20
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	This lawsuit is a reason for me to avoid Kodak products / services. If Kodak has an issue with Pentax regarding a time when Pentax was owned by Hoya, why haven't they been knocking on Hoya's doors? If the reason is that the current owner is responsible then why aren't the $76m flowing to the current owners of the patents in question (Kodak sold them)? And how on earth does packaging a DSLR with a kit lens make the DLSR a "self-contained" device? Yuck. BTW, this thread could be merged with this one.

10-28-2013, 08:10 PM	#21
yakky New Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 17	It's a shame a once innovative company is now a patent troll.

10-28-2013, 08:33 PM	#22
Vylen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,262	Originally posted by yakky It's a shame a once innovative company is now a patent troll. I would definitely not call them a patent troll.

10-28-2013, 08:39 PM - 1 Like	#23
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	A patent is a piece of property like any other. Would you be happy if someone used your property without paying for it? Owning and enforcing ones patents does not make someone a patent troll any more than owning a home and not wanting vagrants sleeping in your living room makes you a home owning troll.

10-29-2013, 05:18 AM	#24
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Kozlok A patent is a piece of property like any other. Would you be happy if someone used your property without paying for it? Owning and enforcing ones patents does not make someone a patent troll any more than owning a home and not wanting vagrants sleeping in your living room makes you a home owning troll. Unless the patent is invalid... Apple, RIM win in patent case vs. Kodak affirmed by ITC - Computerworld Kodak was using the 218-patent to extort money from other companies. Apple & RIM decided they weren't going to pay and took Kodak to court. The ITC Judge found that they were infringing the patent, but that the patent was invalid. That was the end of Kodak's delusion of the patent portfolio being worth a billion dollars...

10-29-2013, 08:16 AM	#25
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Vylen I would definitely not call them a patent troll. As I pointed out above, Ricoh is also suing Kodak for patent infringement on printers.