iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Kodak Seeks $1 Billion From Apple, RIM In Patent Lawsuit

By BEN DOBBIN   03/25/11 08:10 PM ET   AP

ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- A federal agency said Friday that it will review Eastman Kodak Co.'s high-stakes patent-infringement claim against technology giants Apple Inc. and Research in Motion Ltd.

The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington, D.C., agreed to examine a judge's finding in January that Apple's iPhone and RIM's BlackBerry don't violate an image-preview patent the photography pioneer obtained in 2001.

The decision revives Kodak's hopes of negotiating royalties worth $1 billion or more. The agency's six commissioners will decide by May 23 whether to alter the initial determination by its chief administrative judge, Paul Luckern, or let it stand.

Kodak spokesman Gerard Meuchner said "we are pleased with the decision and we look forward to the next step in the process."

The company has amassed more than 1,000 digital-imaging patents, and almost all digital cameras rely on that technology. Mining its rich array of inventions has become an indispensable tool in a long and painful turnaround.

That campaign was stalled by the recession, which began just after Kodak completed a three-year, $3.4 billion digital overhaul in 2007. Its payroll has plunged to 18,800 people, from 70,000 in 2002.

Kodak's shares jumped 27 cents, or 8.6 percent, to close at $3.40 Friday, then shot up 72 more cents to $4.12 in after-hours trading. They are trading in a 52-week range of $2.90 to $9.08.

Messages seeking comment from RIM were not immediately returned. An Apple spokeswoman said the company had no comment.

After failed negotiations, Kodak filed a complaint against Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple and Waterloo, Ontario-based RIM in January 2010 with the commission that oversees U.S. trade disputes. It also filed two lawsuits against Apple in federal court in Rochester, but it has not specified the damages it is seeking.

In December 2009, the commission ruled that cell phones made by Samsung Electronics Co. and LG Electronics Inc. infringed the same Kodak patent, and Kodak received a one-time $550 million royalty payment from Samsung and a $414 million deal was reached with LG Electronics.

The 131-year-old camera maker has said it expects to continue to generate an average of between $250 million and $350 million annually through 2013 from licensing its digital technology. Over the last three years, it outpaced that figure, booking $1.9 billion in revenue.

Kodak has banked on replacing hefty profits it once made on film, with promising new lines of home inkjet printers and high-speed inkjet presses. It expects to generate its first profits from consumer printers this year and its commercial line is targeted to turn profitable in 2012.

Separately, ITC judge E. James Gildea issued an initial ruling in a dispute between Apple and Nokia Corp. on Friday, saying Apple did not infringe on five of Nokia's patents.

Nokia, the world's largest maker of cell phones, filed a complaint with the ITC in Dec. 2009, alleging Apple's iPods, iPhone and computers violate Nokia's intellectual property rights. At issue were key features found in Apple products, including aspects of user interface, cameras, antenna and power management technologies, Nokia said at the time. The company claimed that the technologies in question help cut manufacturing costs, reduce gadget size and prolong battery life.

The cell phone maker began its patent fight with Apple in October 2009, filing its first patent infringement claim against Apple in Delaware. Apple filed a countersuit, claiming Nokia was infringing on a variety of its patents.

Apple countersued Nokia in the U.S., and also filed a counter-complaint with the ITC.

Nokia has also filed patent lawsuits last year against Apple in Britain, Germany and the Netherlands.

Apple had no comment on Gildea's ruling. A spokeswoman for Nokia did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

___

AP Technology Writer Rachel Metz in San Francisco contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- A federal agency said Friday that it will review Eastman Kodak Co.'s high-stakes patent-infringement claim against technology giants Apple Inc. and Research in Motion Ltd. The U.S.
ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- A federal agency said Friday that it will review Eastman Kodak Co.'s high-stakes patent-infringement claim against technology giants Apple Inc. and Research in Motion Ltd. The U.S.
Filed by Catharine Smith  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 163
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
helioszephyr
What do you mean by "micro"?!
10:52 AM on 03/28/2011
A bit more light on the matter:

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/03/26/kodak-dont-spend-that-1bn-just-yet/#more-55628
01:28 AM on 03/28/2011
I see many people here complaining about Kodak, but almost none about Apple. The mindset appears to be I like my ipod/iphone/ipad, so who cares!

Apple is a sleaze bag company and has been since the mid 90's when they lost the PC wars with IBM and Microsoft. They steal their tech from other companies, and then charge huge fees for licenses to people who want to create accessories or programs to be used with their products or sue them to death if they don't get one. They are the worst company when it comes to suing people or companies for infringement yet they continuously steal from other companies for the ideas of "their" creations.

This article isn't about Kodak as much as it is about Apple and how it steals its tech. So why are so many people complaining about Kodak instead of Apple's thievery? You can't say its the lawsuit, Apple has WAY more of those than Kodak!

Lets all jump on the bandwagon and defend them to feel like we're a part of the fad of loving their stolen, overpriced, bugged out products.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
05:53 AM on 03/28/2011
You nailed it and stole my post:)
X2
10:48 PM on 03/29/2011
Great minds think alike!
photo
helioszephyr
What do you mean by "micro"?!
09:33 AM on 03/28/2011
I've dealt with Kodak and their products in my profession for many years, and can't disagree with you more. Aside from falling asleep at the wheel, they're attempts at competing with advanced technologies in the market place was pathetic over the past 20 years.

Yes, they hold many patents, but doesn't lend them any credibility in how they service a customer base and move the industry. If it wasn't for Apple and other consumer electronics companies who take technology to the market, Kodak would have been long gone... after all, it's the companies that incorporate and take that tech (including patents held by Kodak) that Kodak lives (survives) off of.

Here's a company that's been in the photo business for an eternity and totally botched their attempt at the pro DSLR market. The product had design and manufacturing flaws, and their customer support was a joke. And bear in mind that they hold tech patents in some of the best sensor technology. Go figure.

As for thievery and Apple... I think you're way out of line. Whether Apple develops a technology, licenses or buys it, they are driving the market. They have the leverage to dictate the dynamics. I think Kodak should be thankful for companies like Apple that are keeping it alive.
10:47 PM on 03/29/2011
Actually, no, I am not out of line. Apple could do exactly what they constantly sue everyone else for, which is to pay for a technology. They refuse. They are getting a taste of their own medicine and now its boohoo for them.

Beyond that Kodak has had many problems, part of which is other companies getting away with using their tech and not paying for it, then flooding the market with the stolen tech and taking business away from them. As far as DSLR market there isn't as much money to be had there as a lot of people think. Not to mention the undertaking and the capital it would take to even begin producing lenses like Nikon and Cannon. Professionals aren't going to risk money on new equipment when there is more proven stuff out there. It could be many years before they would make a return.

How you are able to blame them for this is pretty mind boggling.

The way Kodak decides to develop or market their products has nothing to do with the legality of what Apple has been doing. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Kodak expecting to get paid for their own tech when another company is profiting from it without permission. If the tables were turned, everyone would be out for Apple to sue Kodak. Your comment is exactly what I am saying about defending them for no more reason than "I like their junk"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WSAY
Res ipsa loquitur
09:26 PM on 03/27/2011
Kodak is on its last leg. This is their hail Mary pass.
06:59 PM on 03/27/2011
when your business model is 'sue for patent infringement', your company has very little time left
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:46 PM on 03/27/2011
I agree.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
08:22 PM on 03/27/2011
So, you don'r believe in defending what you own, either?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WSAY
Res ipsa loquitur
09:26 PM on 03/27/2011
They don't own it. Keep up.
06:56 PM on 03/27/2011
I don't think many people in this thread realize just how much money Kodak spends on research. They were not "falling sleep behind the wheel", they were innovating. Their big mistake was marketing and bringing their ideas to fruition on the consumer market. This, however, is changing now with their new line of printers which are getting universal acclaim. Since I work for a company that is a *major* competitor of Kodaks, this does not benefit me any. :)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
05:55 AM on 03/28/2011
You're correct. Kodak has been a major innovator.

They've suffered from being ahead of the curve in some instances.
photo
helioszephyr
What do you mean by "micro"?!
09:36 AM on 03/28/2011
they suffer from not understanding the market.

see my comment downstream.
KennebunkportIndependent
Back in my day, we had NINE planets.
05:43 PM on 03/27/2011
Kodak came late to the digital age, clinging on to film when it was clear film would die.   It looks as though this once great company will survive on one product, and law suits.  What happens when others' technology outpaces Kodak's?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:48 PM on 03/27/2011
Chapter 11. Then, liquidation or a sell off of assets.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
08:25 PM on 03/27/2011
Film was the cash cow for Kodak forever. If they were on the way out (which I do not believe) they would be selling their patent portfolio off, not defending it.
05:33 PM on 03/27/2011
when you have become innovationless, start suing...lile microsoft is doing
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SoCalNick
Former 99er, Business Owner, Proud Veteran 101st
06:49 PM on 03/27/2011
I was wondering how fast some MS Hater would make this about MS. Pitiful. WRONG and Pitiful
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:49 PM on 03/27/2011
We don't agree on a lot of things but on this I'm with you. But, hey, this is the HP Tech blog, after all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WSAY
Res ipsa loquitur
09:28 PM on 03/27/2011
When a consumer sues a company the Right screams "Tort Reform," but when a company sues a company, that is just "business."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stoopid American
Trooth, justice, and the American way ...
04:34 PM on 03/27/2011
The patent system is irretrievably broken. It now suppresses innovation. It is merely a tool to help big stodgy companies stay big and stodgy. It only serves the interests of patent lawyers.

Abolish the patent system now. Funnel enforcement effort into copyright protection instead, which is a legitimate cause.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cgeorgan
Proud American-Canadian Libertarian
04:54 PM on 03/27/2011
Nonsense.  You must be Chinese.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stoopid American
Trooth, justice, and the American way ...
04:59 PM on 03/27/2011
Nonsense yourself. You must never have created a product and had to do a patent search.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
07:56 PM on 03/27/2011
Absolute nonsense.
04:23 PM on 03/27/2011
It is almost impossible to bring a new tech product to market these days. Through the last dozen years, there have been many many companies that are formed to just write patents on the use of the internet to do something.

For example, back in 2002, I was working on an internet medical records site. Ran up against a patent claim that read (and was granted!) "using the internet to view medical records."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cgeorgan
Proud American-Canadian Libertarian
04:55 PM on 03/27/2011
Just because somebody has a patent, it does not mean that patent is valid and enforceable.  Patent examiners (regular people just like you and I) regularly grant patents that should not have been granted.  It is up to the courts to decide, with actual experts examining the merits of each patent.
photo
Bushwhacked
Stay active, informed and VOTE in 2014!
06:30 PM on 03/27/2011
Sounds like a waste of court time.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
07:54 PM on 03/27/2011
U.S. patents are assumed to be valid when granted. It is a rebuttable presumption.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
08:18 PM on 03/27/2011
There must be more to this story. I doubt that's all the claim entailed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CollectiveId
03:13 PM on 03/27/2011
This is stupid whats next a patent for breathing? (sarcasm)
04:19 PM on 03/27/2011
SHHHHH!!!!!
05:04 PM on 03/27/2011
That's probably the next step.

"Life Forms" are already patentable.

Thanks to Clarence Thomas, when the wind blows patented pollen to your plants, the resulting seeds can't be used without paying tribute to Monsanto!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:50 PM on 03/27/2011
Exactly. I see you've watched Food, Inc.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Superb1
Marine Viet-Vet.
02:54 PM on 03/27/2011
When dinosaurs collide, us ants will suffer.
02:45 PM on 03/27/2011
I hope they win and funnel the money into their film affairs. :)
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
03:51 PM on 03/27/2011
Why don't you ask Kodak how well that instant photography business went for them a number of years ago, after being sued for patent infringement by Polaroid Corp.?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Superb1
Marine Viet-Vet.
03:57 PM on 03/27/2011
what goes around..........
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
02:35 PM on 03/27/2011
When Apple sued Microsoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_v._Microsoft
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SoCalNick
Former 99er, Business Owner, Proud Veteran 101st
06:51 PM on 03/27/2011
The came back and PAID MS to use ITS GUI so people would like their OS interface again. You will now see apple fans deny this .. but it is a fact.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:19 PM on 03/27/2011
I just read the patent. It describes exactly how a digital camera works. How could this patent could have ever been given to Kodak in 2001?

I had a logitec camera in 1994 that did EXACTLY what is described on the patent. Then I had an olympus camera in 1997, and again, it did the same thing.

There are so many patents nowadays that you can't breath without stumbling upon a patent.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
03:46 PM on 03/27/2011
It's not necessarily what the specification describes (which also may include a description of the prior art) it depends upon what the claims recite. I think you read only the specification.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:07 PM on 03/27/2011
No, that's not what I'm talking about. It seems that the patent translates to "displaying the moving image on the LCD replacing the viewfinder." Unless they applied for this patent in the late 1970s and only now it was granted... I think there was plenty of prior art during this time. What do you think?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mediamarv
1-2-3 Is this thing working?
02:17 PM on 03/27/2011
The new American business model: don't make anything just keep the suits busy suing other companies that actually produce products that consumers want. And with the ignorance level at an all time high in the courts, a fast talking shyster can easily get fiction accepted as truth.
photo
tumbler snapper
Lawyer, engineer, author, adventurer
03:49 PM on 03/27/2011
Don't bet on it, Marv. Patent cases are lengthly and difficult (which makes them expensive) and the decisions have a nasty way of being overturned by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.