Patenting gone crazy: Amazon patents studio lighting technique

NicoleC · 05-08-2014, 03:39 PM

Amazon?s latest patent is sillier than the peanut butter sandwich patent | Ars Technica

The "Studio Arrangement" patent

Quote:

...includes: "A front light source aimed at a background, an image capture position located between the background and the front light source, an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background, and at least one rear light source positioned between the elevated platform and the background."

Oy.

VisualDarkness · 05-08-2014, 05:06 PM

That is crazy

adwb · 05-08-2014, 10:53 PM

More modern dipshittery

KevinR · 05-09-2014, 12:03 PM - **2 Likes**

Someone should stop this foolish stuff by lodging a patent for "a general method to make money by lodging stupid patents and then patent trolling". Crazy patent foolery will bring down the whole system very soon. It just cannot get any more ridiculous than some of the actions going on such as For world?s biggest troll, first patent case ends up in tatters | Ars Technica

jmerchant · 05-09-2014, 12:55 PM

I was just coming to post about this...
My first thought was how this will screw all the little guys who do product shots for the stuff they sale, but it sounds pretty specific and easily avoidable, but seriously who's gonna monitor this, and does EXIF capture the number of lights/flashes used?

here's a little more...
Did Amazon just patent the seamless background setup?: Digital Photography Review
us8676045 - Photography lighting (Amazon) - Issued Patent - PRIOR ART REQUEST - Ask Patents

MRRiley · 05-12-2014, 06:14 AM

This patent is most likely indefensible and unenforceable since the general method predates the creation of Amazon by at least a hundred years. That the Patent Office actually granted it is evidence that no one there actually reads what they are approving or has any idea what they are doing. I'll keep using my studio lights and seamless backgrounds as I like without fear of Amazon and their "patent."

Harley Davidson once tried to patent the sound of their V-twin engine.... potato potato potato... basically the sound that every v-twin engine made makes... They LOST!

**RobA_Oz** · 05-12-2014, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by MRRiley

This patent is most likely indefensible and unenforceable since the general method predates the creation of Amazon by at least a hundred years. That the Patent Office actually granted it is evidence that no one there actually reads what they are approving or has any idea what they are doing. I'll keep using my studio lights and seamless backgrounds as I like without fear of Amazon and their "patent."

Harley Davidson once tried to patent the sound of their V-twin engine.... potato potato potato... basically the sound that every v-twin engine made makes... They LOST!

While we can laugh at this sort of Tom-foolery, the trouble for the rest of the world is that any country having a Free Trade Agreement with the US is liable to fall into the net created by this sort of nonsense, because without recognition of US patents, you don't get an FTA.

I thought the different sound of the H-D V-twin arose from the cheapskate arrangement of both cylinders sharing one crank-pin. I read a review once that said the H-D sound is like an industrial fart, compared with the melodious throb of the Moto Guzzi California, a couple of metaphors I can appreciate, having heard both.

NicoleC · 05-12-2014, 07:33 AM

It's very expensive and legally time consuming to overturn a patent. I suspect Amazon filed this as a defense patent. It's likely to be ignored broadly (for obvious reasons) and Amazon won't expend any effort enforcing it. But if someone tries to sue Amazon over a patent issue, they'll fire right back.

Or, I could be wrong. These are the folks with the "One-Click ordering" patent, which they HAVE enforced.

Parallax · 05-12-2014, 08:05 AM

This is a patent for a procedure, not an object. I didn't even know that you could do that. Since you obviously can, maybe someone should patent the procedure for warehousing merchandise from multiple retailers and selling the merchandise on their behalf. Then send Amazon a Cease and Desist order.

Mike is right in that it is indefensible. If patents and copyrights are not jealously defended by the holder, they become public domain. This is why you hear of stories like Disney suing a mom-and-pop grocery store for having a picture of Mickey Mose eating a doughnut painted on their wall. If they don't defend it, they loose it.
Amazon would have to sue virtually every creator of every product ad in publication.

**monochrome** · 05-12-2014, 08:26 AM

So can I sue Amazon for handling the order I placed last year for a Studio Lighting Kit that included (among other things) a while backdrop, 8 fluourescent natural light bulbs, 4 small can lights and stands, two large umbrellas, lights and stands, four reflectors, 8 spring clips and a folding table?

PiDicus Rex · 05-12-2014, 08:32 AM

Ahhh, guys,....
First up, lets be glad they didn't try to patent 3-point lighting,...
What they have done though, and I bet it's what they're really aiming for, is patent a lighting technique that is nearly identical to that of Green Screen Lighting, so if they can get that passed too, they could demand royalties from all the major film distributors,.... Or block film distribution through Amazon for any film production that doesn't comply.
I'm betting Hollywood's lawyers are going to be rubbing thier hands together thinking of all the money they'll be making from a new income source.

And Indie films will be the first to drop any Behind Scenes DVD extras, to stop anyone from seeing how their shots were lit.

NicoleC · 05-12-2014, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

If patents and copyrights are not jealously defended by the holder, they become public domain. This is why you hear of stories like Disney suing a mom-and-pop grocery store for having a picture of Mickey Mose eating a doughnut painted on their wall. If they don't defend it, they loose it.

Copyrights do not have to be defended and items do not become public domain due to lack of enforcement -- ever. They expire when they expire, according to the various laws. (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf)

Patents also do not have to be defended to remain effective. This is part of the problem with patent trolls -- they buy up patents that weren't defended and are in general use and then try to sue everyone. Reform is much needed here. (General Information Concerning Patents)

Trademarks, however, DO have to be defended. If you do not defend it, it is considered abandoned. Unlike patents and copyrights, trademarks are based on use, not registration. Underwood's devil was trademarked in 1870, and is still in use and still valid for that reason. Disney has trademarked Mickey Mouse, hence why they aggressively pursue violations. Films featuring MM, however, are copyrighted.

**monochrome** · 05-12-2014, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by NicoleC

Copyrights do not have to be defended and items do not become public domain due to lack of enforcement -- ever. They expire when they expire, according to the various laws. (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf)

Patents also do not have to be defended to remain effective. This is part of the problem with patent trolls -- they buy up patents that weren't defended and are in general use and then try to sue everyone. Reform is much needed here. (General Information Concerning Patents)

Trademarks, however, DO have to be defended. If you do not defend it, it is considered abandoned. Unlike patents and copyrights, trademarks are based on use, not registration. Underwood's devil was trademarked in 1870, and is still in use and still valid for that reason. Disney has trademarked Mickey Mouse, hence why they aggressively pursue violations. Films featuring MM, however, are copyrighted.

These wrongs will likely not be corrected, however, because adjudicating the complaints is the business of law and something like 90% of our Senators and Representatives have a law degree.

wildman · 05-13-2014, 05:09 AM

I'm not surprised at all.

It seems to me to be the logical result of a culture and society who's values have elevated the idea of property, and particularly private property, to the level of religious dogma.
Water and air can't be far behind.

**monochrome** · 05-13-2014, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by wildman

I'm not surprised at all.

It seems to me to be the logical result of a culture and society who's values have elevated the idea of property, and particularly private property, to the level of religious dogma.
Water and air can't be far behind.

OTOH, everyone who dies of necesity drank water and breathed air, so both should be government regulated, for the general good, as causal elements of death - with 100% certainty.

05-08-2014, 03:39 PM	#1
NicoleC Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Madison, AL Posts: 448	Patenting gone crazy: Amazon patents studio lighting technique Amazon?s latest patent is sillier than the peanut butter sandwich patent \| Ars Technica The "Studio Arrangement" patent Quote: ...includes: "A front light source aimed at a background, an image capture position located between the background and the front light source, an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background, and at least one rear light source positioned between the elevated platform and the background." Oy.

05-12-2014, 01:30 PM	#13
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by NicoleC Copyrights do not have to be defended and items do not become public domain due to lack of enforcement -- ever. They expire when they expire, according to the various laws. (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf) Patents also do not have to be defended to remain effective. This is part of the problem with patent trolls -- they buy up patents that weren't defended and are in general use and then try to sue everyone. Reform is much needed here. (General Information Concerning Patents) Trademarks, however, DO have to be defended. If you do not defend it, it is considered abandoned. Unlike patents and copyrights, trademarks are based on use, not registration. Underwood's devil was trademarked in 1870, and is still in use and still valid for that reason. Disney has trademarked Mickey Mouse, hence why they aggressively pursue violations. Films featuring MM, however, are copyrighted. These wrongs will likely not be corrected, however, because adjudicating the complaints is the business of law and something like 90% of our Senators and Representatives have a law degree. Last edited by monochrome; 05-13-2014 at 06:52 AM.

05-13-2014, 05:09 AM	#14
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	I'm not surprised at all. It seems to me to be the logical result of a culture and society who's values have elevated the idea of property, and particularly private property, to the level of religious dogma. Water and air can't be far behind. Last edited by wildman; 05-13-2014 at 05:45 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Beginner studio lighting	panicAttack	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	15	12-30-2013 03:48 PM
Beginner Studio Lighting Kit Suggestions	synnyster	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	23	12-06-2013 02:24 AM
Gone a little prime crazy	StevenMatchett	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	09-23-2013 05:49 AM
K200D shutter gone crazy	Steve B	Visitors' Center	3	06-11-2012 11:22 AM
A Lighting Technique	benjikan	General Talk	7	08-05-2007 05:42 AM

05-08-2014, 05:06 PM	#2
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	That is crazy

05-08-2014, 10:53 PM	#3
adwb Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bristol UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,636	More modern dipshittery

05-09-2014, 12:03 PM - 2 Likes	#4
KevinR Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Cape Town, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 653	Someone should stop this foolish stuff by lodging a patent for "a general method to make money by lodging stupid patents and then patent trolling". Crazy patent foolery will bring down the whole system very soon. It just cannot get any more ridiculous than some of the actions going on such as For world?s biggest troll, first patent case ends up in tatters \| Ars Technica

05-09-2014, 12:55 PM	#5
jmerchant Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: West Jordan Utah Posts: 200	I was just coming to post about this... My first thought was how this will screw all the little guys who do product shots for the stuff they sale, but it sounds pretty specific and easily avoidable, but seriously who's gonna monitor this, and does EXIF capture the number of lights/flashes used? here's a little more... Did Amazon just patent the seamless background setup?: Digital Photography Review us8676045 - Photography lighting (Amazon) - Issued Patent - PRIOR ART REQUEST - Ask Patents

05-12-2014, 06:14 AM	#6
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	This patent is most likely indefensible and unenforceable since the general method predates the creation of Amazon by at least a hundred years. That the Patent Office actually granted it is evidence that no one there actually reads what they are approving or has any idea what they are doing. I'll keep using my studio lights and seamless backgrounds as I like without fear of Amazon and their "patent." Harley Davidson once tried to patent the sound of their V-twin engine.... potato potato potato... basically the sound that every v-twin engine made makes... They LOST!

05-12-2014, 06:27 AM	#7
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by MRRiley This patent is most likely indefensible and unenforceable since the general method predates the creation of Amazon by at least a hundred years. That the Patent Office actually granted it is evidence that no one there actually reads what they are approving or has any idea what they are doing. I'll keep using my studio lights and seamless backgrounds as I like without fear of Amazon and their "patent." Harley Davidson once tried to patent the sound of their V-twin engine.... potato potato potato... basically the sound that every v-twin engine made makes... They LOST! While we can laugh at this sort of Tom-foolery, the trouble for the rest of the world is that any country having a Free Trade Agreement with the US is liable to fall into the net created by this sort of nonsense, because without recognition of US patents, you don't get an FTA. I thought the different sound of the H-D V-twin arose from the cheapskate arrangement of both cylinders sharing one crank-pin. I read a review once that said the H-D sound is like an industrial fart, compared with the melodious throb of the Moto Guzzi California, a couple of metaphors I can appreciate, having heard both.

05-12-2014, 07:33 AM	#8
NicoleC Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Madison, AL Posts: 448 Original Poster	It's very expensive and legally time consuming to overturn a patent. I suspect Amazon filed this as a defense patent. It's likely to be ignored broadly (for obvious reasons) and Amazon won't expend any effort enforcing it. But if someone tries to sue Amazon over a patent issue, they'll fire right back. Or, I could be wrong. These are the folks with the "One-Click ordering" patent, which they HAVE enforced.

05-12-2014, 08:05 AM	#9
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	This is a patent for a procedure, not an object. I didn't even know that you could do that. Since you obviously can, maybe someone should patent the procedure for warehousing merchandise from multiple retailers and selling the merchandise on their behalf. Then send Amazon a Cease and Desist order. Mike is right in that it is indefensible. If patents and copyrights are not jealously defended by the holder, they become public domain. This is why you hear of stories like Disney suing a mom-and-pop grocery store for having a picture of Mickey Mose eating a doughnut painted on their wall. If they don't defend it, they loose it. Amazon would have to sue virtually every creator of every product ad in publication.

05-12-2014, 08:26 AM	#10
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	So can I sue Amazon for handling the order I placed last year for a Studio Lighting Kit that included (among other things) a while backdrop, 8 fluourescent natural light bulbs, 4 small can lights and stands, two large umbrellas, lights and stands, four reflectors, 8 spring clips and a folding table?

05-12-2014, 08:32 AM	#11
PiDicus Rex Veteran Member Join Date: May 2013 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,381	Ahhh, guys,.... First up, lets be glad they didn't try to patent 3-point lighting,... What they have done though, and I bet it's what they're really aiming for, is patent a lighting technique that is nearly identical to that of Green Screen Lighting, so if they can get that passed too, they could demand royalties from all the major film distributors,.... Or block film distribution through Amazon for any film production that doesn't comply. I'm betting Hollywood's lawyers are going to be rubbing thier hands together thinking of all the money they'll be making from a new income source. And Indie films will be the first to drop any Behind Scenes DVD extras, to stop anyone from seeing how their shots were lit.

05-12-2014, 12:50 PM	#12
NicoleC Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Madison, AL Posts: 448 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax If patents and copyrights are not jealously defended by the holder, they become public domain. This is why you hear of stories like Disney suing a mom-and-pop grocery store for having a picture of Mickey Mose eating a doughnut painted on their wall. If they don't defend it, they loose it. Copyrights do not have to be defended and items do not become public domain due to lack of enforcement -- ever. They expire when they expire, according to the various laws. (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf) Patents also do not have to be defended to remain effective. This is part of the problem with patent trolls -- they buy up patents that weren't defended and are in general use and then try to sue everyone. Reform is much needed here. (General Information Concerning Patents) Trademarks, however, DO have to be defended. If you do not defend it, it is considered abandoned. Unlike patents and copyrights, trademarks are based on use, not registration. Underwood's devil was trademarked in 1870, and is still in use and still valid for that reason. Disney has trademarked Mickey Mouse, hence why they aggressively pursue violations. Films featuring MM, however, are copyrighted.

05-13-2014, 06:55 AM	#15
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by wildman I'm not surprised at all. It seems to me to be the logical result of a culture and society who's values have elevated the idea of property, and particularly private property, to the level of religious dogma. Water and air can't be far behind. OTOH, everyone who dies of necesity drank water and breathed air, so both should be government regulated, for the general good, as causal elements of death - with 100% certainty.