Is RED's Compressed RAW Patent Becoming a Problem?

[Bruce Allen]

It's not even ecn-2. It's ECN-2.

Straw mans argument my ass.

ECN is an acronym for Eastman Camera Negative.

You are, once again, comparing different things.

Then in the next sentence, you double down on denying you're creating a straw man argument after you made one again

I have read plenty of spec sheets for plenty of big movies and shows.

Also, by your argument they would write ProRes as PRORES. Um, which they don't.

If we're talking about an acronym or a specific company thing like ARRIRAW or REDCODE RAW, capitalize it if that's the convention. If a company invented it, they get to do camel case ProRes or whatever and we follow it for clarity.

If you're talking about a general thing like Log or the concept of raw or clipping, then you follow standard English grammar.

I'm not stressed, I'm just amused and I think it absolutely speaks to this divide in the industry RE: whether the concept of compressed raw video is / should be patentable or not.

Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

I'm just amused and I think it absolutely speaks to this divide in the industry RE: whether the concept of compressed raw video is / should be patentable or not.

All I know about IP law is that you can't copyright or patent an idea. Is that what you are talking about? I have not read the Red patent.

 

[Mike P.]

I dunno, no one should have been allowed something as broad as “compressed raw” (which is both format and compression technique independent)… It’s kinda ludicrous it’d be granted, but as Med mentioned, it’s more a failure on the patent office and the genie can’t be put back in the bottle (almost like whoever issued it didn’t really understand it).

Does anyone own the patent for uncompressed raw?

As for “raw” vs “RAW”, isn’t that just semantics? It’s not an acronym, “RAW” just caught on. Wouldn’t think it’s something to get bent outta shape about.

All I know about IP law is that you can't copyright or patent an idea. Is that what you are talking about? I have not read the Red patent.

Don’t read it; it’ll annoy you.

As for DJI, it’s just as likely they’re doing it as a cash grab as it was forced on them. Plop down the license fee to get prores raw (and DJI gets their percentage), everyone else gets a cheaper camera.

 

[Phil Holland]

I dunno, no one should have been allowed something as broad as “compressed raw”

Should companies and people be able to patent something broad like "video camera" or "digital imaging"?

Just curious what the POV is here.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Should companies and people be able to patent something broad like "video camera" or "digital imaging"?

I think that is the point, as it is a fundamental legal principle. Although somehow we got distracted talking about capitalisations.

 

[James Sielaff]

The more interesting question is:

Is the raw patent holding RED back?

 

[Nick Morrison]

The more interesting question is:

Is the raw patent holding RED back?

Maybe, but I think they have bigger problems to contend with - like in truth the are a small, still relatively new company competing against some world's lagest brands - Sony, Canon, etc. And then competing with Arri, which has been the standard for 100 years.

It's not like they have it easy.

I'm sure if anything they appreciate (and need) the revenue these patents are bringing in.

 

[Marc Wielage]

All I know about IP law is that you can't copyright or patent an idea. Is that what you are talking about? I have not read the Red patent.

Here's a link to a list of the Red Camera patents:

https://www.red.com/legal/patent



and an article on the Apple vs. Red lawsuit...

https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/apple-vs-red/



and a story on how the Apple lawsuit was dismissed:

https://www.cined.com/apples-patent-challenge-against-red-dismissed-red-raw-patent-remains-valid/



Some years ago, Red sued Sony over Sony's use of raw recording in their cameras:

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/red-sues-sony-for-patent-infringement


and Sony countersued:

https://www.computerworld.com/article/2709104/sony-countersues-red-over-seven-camera-patents.html


As far as I know, Sony & Red settled, but I dunno if any money (or technology rights) changed hands. My guess is that Apple had to pay Red over ProRes Raw.