-
Apple sues RED over RAW Patents
updated 2 years, 10 months ago
10 Members
·
17 Posts
-
Apple sues RED over RAW Patents
-
hysterical.
wow – Apple is really becoming evil. Its more than System Integrity Protection. It’s more than
obsoleting all their old hardware. They just want to screw everyone that is not an official “partner”.
I guess a Trillion dollars is just not enough profit. I guess they forgot that without Adobe and AJA and AVID, (and now Blackmagic and Sonnet) – that no professional would take Apple seriously.What is wrong with these people.
Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com -
I wouldn’t be so quick to blame Apple.
There are quite a few reasonable cases being made that RED’s patents should never have been granted in the first place. If you read through the actual brief (following the links in the EOSHD post to the PDF), Apple’s expert’s position comes down to the claim that RED’s patent is based on two or three other prior patents. It will be up to a judge to decide.
Why this started in May is anyone’s guess. Remember that RED was in favor with Apple a while back, because there was a RED Raven bundle on the Apple web store. We don’t know whether either party was playing hardball or not and this is the result.
In any case, it may well be a contributor to why we haven’t seen much progress with ProRes RAW implementation. But as you know, ultimately these things get settled quietly.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Maybe this will break Red’s stranglehold on in-camera, compressed raw capture… would that be so bad?
Shawn
-
I welcome the entire thing.
More clarity will help everyone.A LOT of people who are in a position to know seem to feel that some of the original RED patents were too broad and are restricting the industry’s ability to move forward.
Others feel Apple is now somewhat hoist on it’s own “keep your less advanced tech off our shiny platform” petard. (cough, cough, Flash, etc. )
I suspect the truth, as usual, is someplace in the middle.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Well… If their patent is deemed to be valid, then RED should have every right to vigorously defend it. We’ll see how this shakes out.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
And the result will have serious implications for Blackmagic as well. I suspect they have designed their compressed RAW around the RED patents with the sidecar data and pre processing so they might be better placed than Apple with ProResRAW.
-
[Bob Zelin] “Apple is really becoming evil.”
Because they’re trying to open up an important option for everyone (which doesn’t even include themselves at this point) and therefore are challenging an absolutely ludicrous patent? Fascinating logic.
[Bob Zelin] “They just want to screw everyone that is not an official “partner”.”
You DO know that RED is an “official partner”, right? E.G. having made an FCP plugin and having the Raven selling in the Store exclusively? How much more “partner” are you looking for? RED selling Macs?
[Bob Zelin] ” a Trillion dollars is just not enough profit”
Apple has never made a trillion profit, sorry. Unless you want to count the entire last 30 years. But then I’m pretty sure it’s a lot more.
[Oliver Peters] “There are quite a few reasonable cases being made that RED’s patents should never have been granted in the first place. “
Exactly. Patenting “writing compressed sensor data to a disk in a camera“?? They basically used existing tech, strung it together as a package, patented that package and are now suing others over it. That’s pretty much the textbook definition of a patent-troll. The only thing that they uniquely contributed was their own take on the (again, already existing) wavelet compression algorithm. That’s like if I patented “rolling a transportation vehicle with four wheels over gravel at 30mph” and was granted it, then stand by the road stopping people. It’s absolutely ludicrous.
[Oliver Peters] “it may well be a contributor to why we haven’t seen much progress with ProRes RAW implementation”
What else? Clearly a LOT of camera OEMs are interested. Why would they prefer to play money into AtomOS’ hands and not just implement the recording internally if they weren’t in fact simply afraid of having to deal with RED and licensing demands if they do? Apple’s requirements for implementing it certainly couldn’t be holding them back. Especially since many of them are ALREADY recording other flavors of ProRes. Not exactly much of a stretch there.
By the way… Apple isn’t suing RED. They are petitioning to have the patent revoked. Big difference.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Because they’re trying to open up an important option for everyone (which doesn’t even include THEMSELVES) and therefore are challenging an absolutely ludicrous patent? Fascinating logic.”
I’m not sure if the intent is “open up…. for everyone” but more of ProRes RAW options for Apple.
The patent is no more ludicrous than a rounded corner icon. -
Why is the parent so ludicrous? Hasn’t it stood before against Sony and canon, and blackmagic? Isn’t it why sony had to ‘reach an agreement’ with red about raw acquisition?
I’m really very curious at this case, as it seems as though if Apple lose the motion to strike, they are left with the option of buying red or writing them a big cheque to continue with their plans. When you read about the early work of Graham nattress, it does absolutely seem as though there is a field of work linked to a hardware solution that has been patented, so hearing people call the patent ludicrous makes me question what the grounds for patent are. Oh – the rounded corner icon – that’s an analogy Jim Jannard used when defending in 2013 against canon I believe? Nicely done.
Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk
Log in to reply.