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 :)

Red sue Sony

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ash Worth said:
If RED thinks these cameras will hurt their business then they must be good cameras. Ironically we purchased an F5 yesterday and will see if they are available on the 23rd. They have already been delivered in Canada.

It hurts everybody the less competition out there, we all know how this goes. Surprised at the comments.
Click to expand...

I don't think "competition" is the issue here. I think few will argue with you that "competition is good".

What is at question here is getting paid for your inventions, and making sure that "competition" thrives will "inventions" are protected.

"Competition" that is built upon "theft" is not competition, but instead legally liable "opportunism" that can be questioned in court, if there is merit.
 
Roger Valdes said:
Not sure where all the hate towards Sony comes from... sure, they aint perfect. But neither is RED
sony cameras never failed on me. I can't say the same for my Red One or the many Epics i have worked with.
Click to expand...

I don't understand it myself, Red was a big deal to a lot of people I guess but with out Mini DV or the cameras that came about because of Mini DV I may have never made a single short film to this day, they aren't exactly festival quality shorts but at least there is a platform that a small fry like myself can use as an arena to hone my creative talent, It should also be remembered that it was Sony not Red that began the Digital Cinema revolution, it was Sony that introduced the Super 35mm sensor in the Panavision Genesis the Red one just came along and did it better.
 
Craig W. Bickerstaff said:
I don't understand it myself, Red was a big deal to a lot of people I guess but with out Mini DV or the cameras that came about because of Mini DV I may have never made a single short film to this day, they aren't exactly festival quality shorts but at least there is a platform that a small fry like myself can use as an arena to hone my creative talent, It should also be remembered that it was Sony not Red that began the Digital Cinema revolution, it was Sony that introduced the Super 35mm sensor in the Panavision Genesis the Red one just came along and did it better.
Click to expand...

I don't think RED 'has it in for Sony'... RED actually praised them for finally adopting 4k. At least they did until they found out Sony was cheating off of RED. This isn't about history... it's about theft of intellectual property... now!
 
Roger Valdes said:
A picture doesn't say anything about production problems. :- )
It could have been shot with a Nikon for all we know.
Click to expand...

Ummm, Roger, calling your host a liar, although in a disguised way? Not a good way to maximize their hospitality, I think.
 
Ash Worth said:
If RED thinks these cameras will hurt their business then they must be good cameras. ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is true. If Red is saying that the cameras have and will irreparably hurt Red's bottom line and must no longer be sold, then that is a backhanded testimonial by Red of these cameras' abilities.
 
Here's the deal. The society in America is such that when someone wants to sue someone else, and keep them in court for an extended amount of time, even with only a very little bit of evidence then they are able to. The people that own RED are very, very cut throat, and they will not let anyone stand in their way. Think about it this way... What would you do if you owned RED... WOuld you look at all of Sony's new gear and say "oh dear, I'll just step aside and let you through, your bigger than me"...... which seems to be what some are suggesting here. Or would you stick your chest out, and put your fat finger in their chest and say "Not... On... My... Watch!"

I would probably use this system to my advantage and fight like a big dog, if it were me...

Roger Valdes said:
Another possibility is that Red is having trouble with their Dragon sensor program and they dont want Sony to have a product on the market that is on par, or perhaps even superior to their own

Red is still a new brand to alot of people... and with other companies entering the 4k market it's going to get though for Red.
Click to expand...
 
Oddly, the most attractive feature of the F55 to me is the live 4K output which, AFAIK, is not directly related to the patents being asserted.

Regardless of the pitfalls of current patent law, I think theft of intellectual property is every bit as much a crime as stealing a car. Just sayin'

Cheers - #19
 
Jon Jones said:
Here's the deal. The society in America is such that when someone wants to sue someone else, and keep them in court for an extended amount of time, even with only a very little bit of evidence then they are able to. The people that own RED are very, very cut throat, and they will not let anyone stand in their way. Think about it this way... What would you do if you owned RED... WOuld you look at all of Sony's new gear and say "oh dear, I'll just step aside and let you through, your bigger than me"...... which seems to be what some are suggesting here. Or would you stick your chest out, and put your fat finger in their chest and say "Not... On... My... Watch!"

I would probably use this system to my advantage and fight like a big dog, if it were me...
Click to expand...

Exactly why i hate the current patent system.
I hope RED loses and these patents get invalidated. The money involved should be used on making better cameras, not killing the competition.
 
It's a dog eat dog world, if they do lose, there's just another dog. It doesn't matter who were buying our cameras from, just as long as they are affordable, which don't forget is the main reason why we all love RED so much! If it were up to Sony, the EPIC would cost $100,000 for the brain.

Roger Valdes said:
Exactly why i hate the current patent system.
I hope RED loses and these patents get invalidated. The money involved should be used on making better cameras, not killing the competition.
Click to expand...
 
Rehan K said:
As of 2011 Sony owned 2265 patents in the US (ranked #7 ahead of Apple, GE, etc), I don't thnk it's a smart move to get into patent wars with Sony, but we will see ....
Click to expand...

I wonder if they've ever defended them? Maybe they aren't good enough patents that anyone would want to copy?
 
Ash Worth said:
If RED thinks these cameras will hurt their business then they must be good cameras. Ironically we purchased an F5 yesterday and will see if they are available on the 23rd. They have already been delivered in Canada.

It hurts everybody the less competition out there, we all know how this goes. Surprised at the comments.
Click to expand...

Looked at in a different way, RED's technology must be so good that ARRI and SONY feel they must steal from them to stay relevant?

And in re: competition, copying is not competition. If SONY innovates in a way that moves the tech forward, that sort of competition is good.
 
The purpose of a grant of a paten tis for the disclosure of the invention so that a person skilled in the art could practice the invention. In return for disclosure, the Government grants the patent holder the right to exclude someone from practicing the invention for the life of its term, 17 years assuming one pays the patent maintenance fees something I know a little about having drafted the legislation submitted by the Carter administration to Congress for a maintenance fee system to pay half the costs or processing and granting a patent. it is at the discretion and up to the patent holder to enforce the exclusion. There are two basic defenses if the patent holder sues claiming infringement. First, that the practice is not an infringement or that the patent is invalid. And very often the courts have held that a patent is not valid. Patent litigation is very very expensive and from start to finish it can take many many years.
 
Elsie N said:
Looked at in a different way, RED's technology must be so good that ARRI and SONY feel they must steal from them to stay relevant?

And in re: competition, copying is not competition. If SONY innovates in a way that moves the tech forward, that sort of competition is good.
Click to expand...

Except at this point there is no evidence of theft. The ARRI case was settled, there were no winners. I can understand that RED owners think this is a good thing faced with competing against a camera system that is more user friendly and doesn't have the baggage of RED but I can't help but feel this is bad news for cinematography, even more negativity will be created towards the brand.

Bill Maher had a great quote about the legal system last week but I won't share for obvious reasons.
 
Ash Worth said:
Except at this point there is no evidence of theft. The ARRI case was settled, there were no winners. I can understand that RED owners think this is a good thing faced with competing against a camera system that is more user friendly and doesn't have the baggage of RED but I can't help but feel this is bad news for cinematography, even more negativity will be created towards the brand.

Bill Maher had a great quote about the legal system last week but I won't share for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...



I feel kinda of bad for buying an epic now lolol I'm afraid of what will happen to red now I haven't got my epic yet though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top