Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Patent lawsuit...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shapour Daneshmand said:
Dear Jim,
having the best camera in the world made in the US and having so many quality jobs created here is a daring and noble effort.
Japan and China have been hijacking America's inovations and ideas for decades and by sucking the blood of their fellow country men and women through slave like factories were able to dominate the world market.
its time some one stands up to them and we, not as your customer but as the members of the family you so painstakingly created will support you.
please DO tell us what we can do to support your justice seeking endeavor.
thank you
Click to expand...


+1, American ideas created with advanced talent on American shores is EXTRAORDINARY!!!
 
Jannard said:
This is a REDCODE RAW issue... one that many have acknowledged for years as a core invention of RED and incredibly important to what we all are doing.

Jim
Click to expand...

For anyone in doubt, you'd be a fool not to patent and protect REDCODE RAW. Indeed if this is one of or the only way to "compress" Raw data, camera manufactures will have some major licensing to pay to Red if they want to go down that road. Sounds like Sony has already gone down it without asking. :bored:

More information for those wondering:

Official Documents:
http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp...ED-DIGITAL-SONY-PATENT-SUIT__130213155619.pdf

Patent 8,174,560 "Video Camera"
http://www.google.com/patents/US8174560

Patent 8,358,357 "Video Camera"
http://www.google.com/patents/US8358357
 
Last edited:
All the best with this, Jim. Among other important things, keeping jobs close to home is no easy feat these days. And the consumer who doesn't give a damn about the origins of goods does not make this any easier for the true innovators. It is clear that very many of us don't care much for principles, as long as our most unreasonable of wants are met. Keep spurring their hides, cowboy. Even if it only means making them work that little bit harder to gain ground.
 
Patents are a tricky thing. They are meant to spur on innovation, but they often have the opposite affect. Here is hoping the outcome in this case is innovation.
 
Best wishes from me too, Jim. You're doing the right thing for the right reasons, hope you'll succeed.
 
Interesting that Red chose to wait until the day after Sony's new cameras start shipping to hit them with the lawsuit, especially since one of the supposed infringing cameras was released a year ago. Very telling.
 
Adam Watson said:
Interesting that Red chose to wait until the day after Sony's new cameras start shipping to hit them with the lawsuit, especially since one of the supposed infringing cameras was released a year ago. Very telling.
Click to expand...

Not really, given that the alledged infringement is a technical one in the code. Even once they'd found it in the code it would have taken a huge amount of man hours to get their proof together. Keeping it secret until they were sure they had a case
gives their legal team a massive head start. The exact timing was probably chosen to have effect, but the fact that its a year after the 1st camera came out is easy to provide this and other potential reasonable explanations.

Without seeing the code in question and being a skilled programmer this would be a foolish one to call either way. Most major companies have form in this area though, and small companies doing it tend to fit a very different profile (I.e file loads of patents and do nothing with them) to RED.

This could easily go either way and timing likely has little to do with how valid the case is.
 
I like that Jim touches on the fact that RED isn't just protecting their intellectual property but they are protecting all of our cameras. Thats what everyone needs to see in this. RED is protecting our investment in RED products and I salute them for that. Sorry if its selfish but I don't want SONY to make a camera that is remotely comparable to my camera that I purchased from RED because I believed in their philosophy.

Good Luck Jim!
 
I actually remember Jim talking about Red's patent on REDCODE RAW a couple years ago on this forum, and basically predicting that someone would try to copy it ... he was essentially warning other companies not to try it. Jim has always clearly understood the value of Redcode RAW, and knew someone would try to cut corners and use his advancements without paying the piper. This actually surprises me not at all, and I doubt seriously that it surprises Jim, maybe aside from the fact that he might not have foreseen a company as large and established as Sony as being the ones who would violate his patent.
 
Dear Jim

Compressing the data has always been vital to digital video.

Raw has always been part of digital image sensors.

Intuitively, if you make a raw digital video camera, you want to compress the data.

Do you really believe you have the right to sue anyone who tries to make a high-resolution video camera that records compressed raw?

Or are you referring to some more specific stuff?

Thank you

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Bruce Allen said:
Dear Jim

Compressing the data has always been vital to digital video.

Raw has always been part of digital image sensors.

Intuitively, if you make a raw digital video camera, you want to compress the data.

Do you really believe you have the right to sue anyone who tries to make a high-resolution video camera that records compressed raw?

Or are you referring to some more specific stuff?

Thank you

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Click to expand...


Exactly. The patents in question are hilariously broad. I don't think Red has any case here.
 
Not sure how enforcing destroying all 4K cameras created by Sony will work out if the courts rule in favor of Red. Also, Red was not the first to compress raw, cineform was also there. I'm guessing that Sony's tech would have to very specifically and obviously rip off Red's for the lawsuit to work out.
 
Bruce,

I think you might be mixing up compressed RAW with RedCode wavelength Compression math. Canon and Nikon developed a means to capture raw data from an image sensor but they both different math and science to understand and interrupt that data with the result being large file sizes. From my understanding Graeme Nattress developed a unique algorithm that allows red to compress RAW video data into extreme small package. I'm assuming Red is using that same unique algorithm for the .RED codec. Now h.265 is on the horizon which will allows us to package video into smaller file sizes then h.264 which is going to be great. But remember that the people that developed h.265 license their unique algorithm to companies to like canon, adobe, etc. to record into that format.

All the Red and Jim are saying is that Sony stole without paying license fee their unique & PANTENTED algorithm which they slaved for years to develop.

The fact that Sony had to steal this algorithm to compete with Red means that sony couldn't figure out any other way around Graeme's genius. Canon however opted to stick with h.264 compression for their 4k cameras to keep the files small.

In my opinion that is what this is all about and I fully support Jim and everyone at Red.


Bruce Allen said:
Dear Jim

Compressing the data has always been vital to digital video.

Raw has always been part of digital image sensors.

Intuitively, if you make a raw digital video camera, you want to compress the data.

Do you really believe you have the right to sue anyone who tries to make a own high-resolution video camera that records compressed raw?

Or are you referring to some more specific stuff?

Thank you

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Click to expand...
 
Patrick Wieland said:
I like that Jim touches on the fact that RED isn't just protecting their intellectual property but they are protecting all of our cameras. Thats what everyone needs to see in this. RED is protecting our investment in RED products and I salute them for that. Sorry if its selfish but I don't want SONY to make a camera that is remotely comparable to my camera that I purchased from RED because I believed in their philosophy.

Good Luck Jim!
Click to expand...

Not really buying this, just sounds like good PR to get the fan support. Protecting the interests of the customer would have meant not halving the value of the cameras overnight last fall. For a company like us that bought almost 20 cameras we would have more appreciated them not devaluing our cameras instantly instead of suing a company that, really, will have no effect on customers of either Red or Sony. I think it's pretty cheap to pull the America card and the the "just looking out for our customers" card when it's more likely about trying to get more money from a market with new competition using a process that has probably been in the works for years.

My prediction is that the lawsuit won't effect the sales of either company's product except minimally in PR on both sides and that Sony will settle eventually without ever going to trial, the sum they pay being a indication of Sony's position on the matter: a small settlement meaning they were innocent but unable to escape a little litigation, a large settlement being an admission of guilt.
 
It is heinously expensive to go into litigation. I imagine there would have to be genuine grounds for this to even kick up.
 
jacob.schwarz said:
Bruce,

I think you might be mixing up compressed RAW with RedCode wavelength Compression math. Canon and Nikon developed a means to capture raw data from an image sensor but they both different math and science to understand and interrupt that data with the result being large file sizes. From my understanding Graeme Nattress developed a unique algorithm that allows red to compress RAW video data into extreme small package. I'm assuming Red is using that same unique algorithm for the .RED codec. Now h.265 is on the horizon which will allows us to package video into smaller file sizes then h.264 which is going to be great. But remember that the people that developed h.265 license their unique algorithm to companies to like canon, adobe, etc. to record into that format.

All the Red and Jim are saying is that Sony stole without paying license fee their unique & PANTENTED algorithm which they slaved for years to develop.

The fact that Sony had to steal this algorithm to compete with Red means that sony couldn't figure out any other way around Graeme's genius. Canon however opted to stick with h.264 compression for their 4k cameras to keep the files small.

In my opinion that is what this is all about and I fully support Jim and everyone at Red.
Click to expand...

I am not coming to conclusions or mixing stuff up. I am just asking Jim a simple question:

"Are you trying to patent the whole idea of a video camera that shoots compressed raw, or something more specific?"

Jacob, you seem to be jumping to conclusions that RED is suing Sony for something more specific - specifically "copying some kind of wavelength Compression math". What do you mean by that exactly?

BTW I have read the patents. Where in the patent is this unique and specific algorithm that Sony is supposed to have copied?

If they have copied REDCODE exactly... sure, sue them! But what if they used their own-developed compressed raw format?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top