Patent lawsuit...

[Niko Pueringer]

The patens are rather informative. For example, they explain how the green channel is exploited (in a clever way) in debayering and there are sketches of how the real time debayering for monitoring is arranged. Such solutions are not obvious and have taken a mental effort.

A post that is information and not speculation. Thanks!

 

[Bruce Allen]

The patens are rather informative. For example, they explain how the green channel is exploited (in a clever way) in debayering and there are sketches of how the real time debayering for monitoring is arranged. Such solutions are not obvious and have taken a mental effort.

I have read the patents.

If Sony has copied specific parts of unique RED inventions in de-Bayering, of course they should be sued.

But there is such a wealth of literature and previous research on de-Bayering, I really doubt that Sony would choose to do that.

Also, most of RED's patent seems to just cover existing discoveries in de-Bayering. Using the green channel in a clever way is kinda the whole point of the Bayer sensor. How is this new? Just because this is being done at 24fps this is somehow a new discovery?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Terry VerHaar]

It rather astounds me that complete outsiders to this whole affair feel they have enough insight that they can, with a completely straight face, offer a critique of RED's actions. People, let's face it, when it comes to something like this, we don't know shit. We all might disdain lawyers but, at this level, they aren't stupid. Neitrher is Jim, nor Jarred, nor the rest of the management team at RED. They are doing what they think is right and protecting their (and, indirectly, as RED customers, our) interests.

I think we should all be grateful that RED has created the products they have and, when it comes to their management of their own company, leave it to them to make the judgements as to what is the right course of action. Our nattering about the matter is just distracting and mostly unwelcome noise.

 

[Bruce Allen]

It rather astounds me that complete outsiders to this whole affair feel they have enough insight that they can, with a completely straight face, offer a critique of RED's actions. People, let's face it, when it comes to something like this, we don't know shit. We all might disdain lawyers but, at this level, they aren't stupid. Neitrher is Jim, nor Jarred, nor the rest of the management team at RED. They are doing what they think is right and protecting their (and, indirectly, as RED customers, our) interests.

I think we should all be grateful that RED has created the products they have and, when it comes to their management of their own company, leave it to them to make the judgements as to what is the right course of action. Our nattering about the matter is just distracting and mostly unwelcome noise.

Sure, we don't know anything. But we can read the patents and they seem pretty general.

That's why I asked Jim if the plan is to sue anyone who makes a compressed raw video camera, or if it's more specific.

You may be a RED customer first.

I am a filmmaker first.

If RED is trying to patent the idea of a compressed raw video camera in general, then it will hurt filmmaking if they succeed. Simple as that.

So that's why I have asked here for clarification.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Brian Merlen]

With all due respect this a Red/Sony issue and is really none of our business (other then we all probably own products from both firms). I wish JJ the best in this case, and sitting here reading hundreds of comments of wannabe lawyers is kind of crazy. I am sure the real lawyers will sort it out, until then not much any of our comments/concerns/guesses can do. I mean all the speculation in the world won't amount to anything unless your selected to be in the case, which none of us ever would be since we are all biased...

 

[Mike Harrington]

Bruce,

Jim said that the lawsuit is in regards to REDCODE which is the "wavelength Compression math" i was speaking of. So when you asked Jim about if this is about something more specific he had already answered your question and said "This is a REDCODE RAW issue" so i was simply trying to explain to you that this is not about RAW compression and wanted to give you a little background about the technology. Now i have not looked at the patent, but i'm sure there are a lot of equations and diagrams that i won't understand and maybe you don't either.

Hope that clears things up, but again i was just trying to answer your question.

red did not invent raw wavelet compression....they may have a patent on their implementation of it, and at resolutions above 2k....
the Si-2k was doing 2k wavelet compression on a raw signal in there camera in released 2007..


but Red took the initiative and patented the process for high rez...so kudos to Jim...
It is his legal right to defend it

they took to long to criticize Red's approach....when they should have been looking at patents

 

[João Paulo Miranda Maria]

Indeed, the RED pioneer with 4K technology and has every right to sue Sony, if it is copied. The sovereignty of Sony is ending. In Brazil they used to say that Sony was synonymous of "video"....

Jim, we see you as our idol and have our confidence. Keep up the amazing work!

 

[Russ Fill]

Go RED and thank you for protecting yours and our investment in your company as well as our investment in your gear.
I would bet that some of the reason that a lot of us were able to get great deals and support was that in the future this technology would have to be licensed from RED. This is just smart when you have a company that is looking very far in to the future. Its like stealing all your future interest in an investment. And to add insult to it their were those who said that it couldn't be done and that 1080 would be great for time and eturinity. Now those are the same jokers that are ripping us off.
Stealing tech is just that stealing... J
ust because its now the correct answer doesn't mean that, oh we would have figured it out given time and now we can just go from here as though its shareware...

sorry I get pissed when I start to think about it.
Thanks again guys at RED everyone.

 

[jacob.schwarz]

red did not invent raw wavelet compression....they may have a patent on their implementation of it, and at resolutions above 2k....
the Si-2k was doing 2k wavelet compression on a raw signal in there camera in released 2007..


but Red took the initiative and patented the process for high rez...so kudos to Jim...
It is his legal right to defend it

you are right. sorry i wasn't clear on that

 

[Mike Harrington]

Without getting into legal ramifications...or extrapolating this industry wide...

I like the fact that Red is suing Sony for directly copying them....when they spent so much effort criticizing them for the use of that technology.
I am not a Sony hater....but we have enough copied chinese factory crap going on ....we don't need giant corporations getting into it as well

 

[Bruce Allen]

red did not invent raw wavelet compression....they may have a patent on their implementation of it, and at resolutions above 2k....
the Si-2k was doing 2k wavelet compression on a raw signal in there camera in released 2007..

but Red took the initiative and patented the process for high rez...so kudos to Jim...
It is his legal right to defend it

The patent actually says any compression - it's not just the idea of wavelets, it's even broader than that!

From the patent:
"such as but without limitation, JPEG 2000, MotionJPEG, any DCT based codec, any codec designed for compressing RGB image data, H.264, MPEG4, Huffman, or other techniques"

What's ironic is that some of them eg H.264, MPEG4... were designed for compressing video in the first place.

I guess I'm just missing how combining existing digital imaging stuff (shooting raw, Bayer sensors) with existing digital video camera stuff (compression, monitoring, denoising before compression, etc) somehow can lead to a general patent on compressed raw video cameras that is enforcible.

Now I don't know that is the way RED is approaching this. Maybe they are suing Sony for something way more specific. That is why I asked for clarification.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Jon Jones]

It's not that Terry. It's really the sue happy culture that they are really attacking. People are tired of this lawsuit culture. What they don't realize is that what caused the lawsuit culture to breed was a free and open market for creativity. People who are creative will get copied, and this will never stop... That is unless there is a legal ramification.

It rather astounds me that complete outsiders to this whole affair feel they have enough insight that they can, with a completely straight face, offer a critique of RED's actions. People, let's face it, when it comes to something like this, we don't know shit. We all might disdain lawyers but, at this level, they aren't stupid. Neitrher is Jim, nor Jarred, nor the rest of the management team at RED. They are doing what they think is right and protecting their (and, indirectly, as RED customers, our) interests.

I think we should all be grateful that RED has created the products they have and, when it comes to their management of their own company, leave it to them to make the judgements as to what is the right course of action. Our nattering about the matter is just distracting and mostly unwelcome noise.

 

[Curtis Stanton]

That is why I asked for clarification.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

That is the purpose of the trial. It will be clarified in court; everyone with a need to know will be informed of the decision at the end of the process.

 

[Brian Boyer]

The patent actually says any compression - it's not just the idea of wavelets, it's even broader than that!

From the patent:
"such as but without limitation, JPEG 2000, MotionJPEG, any DCT based codec, any codec designed for compressing RGB image data, H.264, MPEG4, Huffman, or other techniques"

What's ironic is that some of them eg H.264, MPEG4... were designed for compressing video in the first place.

I guess I'm just missing how combining existing digital imaging stuff (shooting raw, Bayer sensors) with existing digital video camera stuff (compression, monitoring, denoising before compression, etc) somehow can lead to a general patent on compressed raw video cameras that is enforcible.

Now I don't know that is the way RED is approaching this. Maybe they are suing Sony for something way more specific. That is why I asked for clarification.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

From the little bit of what I read of the patent, I took that part to mean that the compression module will be capable of (but not limited to) compressing TO these formats. I don't think this section claims RED's ownership of the compression of these formats. My legalese is not so good.

The whole paragraph reads as follows:

"Further, the compression module 22 can be configured to compress the image data from the image processing module 20 to result in a visually lossless output. For example, firstly, the compression module can be configured to apply any known compression technique, such as, but without limitation, JPEG 2000, MotionJPEG, any DCT based codec, any codec designed for compressing RGB image data, H.264, MPEG4, Huffman, or other techniques."

It seems to be merely describing general function of what the module does. The language clearly states "any known compression technique".

 

[Shane Betts]

I've been waiting for this to happen - the patent on Redcode RAW was always going to be Red's ace in the hole. Jim was smart enough to patent the compression of RAW when nobody else had even given it a second thought. This is what is meant by innovation. How protectable it might turn out to be in a court of law remains to be seen but Jim's an old hand at this stuff. Sony has a fight ahead of them.

Patents aside, even if the technology exists, even if everyone knows how to do something - if they all choose to not, if they decide that their customers don't deserve the very best of what's available, then any company that takes it upon themselves to deliver the very best to the user base deserves to be applauded for having done so. The industry stalwarts, the Sonys and Canons and Arris and Nikons have all neglected their duty of care for so long - and continue to do so - and that is why Red exists. It's their own fault. No use bleating on about how Red is this and Red is that. If Red is a pain in their arse, it's because they never bothered to scratch in the first place.

 

[Dan Rosario]

Brilliant.

 

[Bruce Allen]

I've been waiting for this to happen - the patent on Redcode RAW was always going to be Red's ace in the hole. Jim was smart enough to patent the compression of RAW when nobody else had even given it a second thought.

Back in 2005, Arri was sending Cineform raw frames from their not-yet-released D20 to test raw compression.

Silicon Imaging and Cineform did compressed raw as a shipping product that was used to shoot a feature in May 2006.

Canon and Nikon were doing compressed raw too - just in their still cameras.

RED talks a lot in their patent about visually lossless compression that is good enough for cinema.

Sony pioneered visually lossless compression for cinema with HDCAM SR back in 2003.

Computers were not powerful enough to do heavy decompression and debayering back in that day so I think Panavision / Sony going with a RGB stripe plus visually lossless compression for the Genesis / F35 was a smart compromise that fit into what was possible in post at the time.

It's definitely not like everyone else was just standing around gawking.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Michael Panfeld]

Sony has a fight ahead of them.

Exactly, this will take a long time in a District court. Which is why I am curious as to the decision to bring a case in that forum rather than a 337 case. The Litepanels case took less than a year and, resulted in a general exclusion order that locks out imports. Since Sony is not making the cameras in the US, this would be a cheaper, faster, and blunter solution than a District Ct patent case. Customs would simply seize the Sony cameras as they crossed the US border.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I'm not going to repeat myself from what I have already said in the other two threads I posted on... Other then I'm with Jim, and KICK ASS and make your work respected by every one, no matter how big they think they are!!



Best of luck!!

 

[Iain Philpott]

Copyright and infringement of that copyright however small or large needs to be defended. Where it has been seen to have been breached/stolen/violated penalties must ensue. Totally supporting RED on this one.