U.S. ITC judge rules against Apple in Kodak patent infringement case

“Eastman Kodak Co’s digital-camera technology doesn’t violate Apple Inc.’s patent rights, a U.S. International Trade Commission judge said,” Susan Decker reports for Bloomberg.

“Neither of the two patents in Apple’s case before the ITC were being infringed, and one of the patents is invalid, Judge Robert Rogers in Washington said today,” Decker reports. “The judge’s findings are subject to review by the six-member ITC, which has the power to block imports of products that infringe U.S. patents… ‘We’re pleased by today’s ruling and we are looking forward to the full ITC commission’s ruling in our case against Apple and RIM, which is expected in late June,’ David Lanzillo, a spokesman for Kodak, said in a statement.”

Decker reports, “One of the Apple patents covers a way a camera can process several images at the same time and the other invention is for a way to handle multiple processes at once, such as adjustments in balance, color, sharpness and resolution. The complaint targeted the Kodak Z series, M series, C series, and Slice cameras, as well as video cameras including the Playsport. The reasons behind the judge’s opinion today won’t be made public until both sides have the chance to redact confidential information.”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn W.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Kodak wins round as ITC to review $1 billion Apple, RIM patent dispute – March 26, 2011
U.S. ITC ruling derails Kodak’s quest for royalties from Apple, RIM – January 24, 2011
Apple files patent infringement lawsuit against Kodak – April 19, 2010
U.S. ITC to probe Apple iPhones, RIM Blackberries after Kodak alleges patent infringement – February 17, 2010
Kodak sues Apple and RIM over image preview patents – January 14, 2010

33 Comments

  1. Screw off Apple, nice try messing with Kodak over camera patents. Just on the surface of it… stupid, stupid, stupid to go after Kodak for patent infringements on cameras coming from a company like Apple. I’m sure Sony and Nokia could sue Apple up the ass for patent infringement on cell phone cameras too.

    Apple, choose your battles very wisely, you’re not the only game in town.

    1. Agreed! Kodak first camera 1888 and the company was founded in 1892. Apple founded 1976.

      No comparison who the real camera maker is amongst the two…

      1. Having worked for Kodak in Rochester, NY, their hometown, I can tell you Kodak does about jack with cameras. Any camera with a Kodak name on it was mad, and possibly even designed, by someone else. Kind of like Kodaks venture into instant photography in the 80s. That got shut down when a court determined that Kodak was violating Polaroid patents.

        1. Kodak owns over 1,000 patents related to Digital Imaging. Most were not assigned to Kodak- they were done@ Kodak.
          BTW- I don’t own shares in Kodak & do own shares in Apple. Just the simple truth.

      2. Uh, the year the companies were founded has nothing to do with modern technology or whether one is better than the other at making cameras. Remember, Kodak made their money on film, not really cameras.

    2. Rookies,

      This lawsuit doesn’t cover cameras as patents but the technologies used to handle and display previews and it didn’t discuss who invented the first camera.

      Kodak first sued Apple and RIM. Apple tried to countersuit. Apple will likely pay damages then pay royalties or reinvent their image processing.

    3. You would have a point, but you must have forgotten Kodak sued Apple first, out of the blue.

      Unless you’re in the “let them beat you up while you just sit there” school of thought, Apple had no choice but to fight back. Funny how people think that when Apple gets sued, Apple is still to blame

  2. Well, now that the hostilities are over, perhaps Apple can talk to Kodak about providing some of their really-damn-nice sensors for an Apple-branded camera!

    Of course, an Apple-cam is probably not in the cards, but I can dream… Kodak sensor, Leica or Zeiss lens, Apple-designed firmware and menu system with wireless Mac.com Gallery integration…

  3. Funny to see all the ignorant losers jump on Apple at every turn. Kodak is going nowhere, as the iPhone is replacing consumer cameras.

    Losers hate winners.

  4. Kodak holds the original patent on the CCD & lots of other basic patents in digital photography.
    Buy the 20k Leica Pro Camera and you are getting a Kodak sensor-& Leica is not alone.
    Apple is a Johnny come lately to digital imaging.

    1. RDF, you just pulled that out of your a**, nice try idiot.

      You falled to read what this is really about, and it’s not about cameras, it’s about tech that apple has had before kodak, but like a lackey your failure to read the whole discovery has left you with all the other Apple haters that refuse to spend a few minutes to read the real complaint.

      As I said before, you are a true Idiot.

      1. I am an Apple shareholder & my Bro is an Attorney & Physicist in the employ of the USPTO.
        If you bothered to read my post instead of erupting in Fanboism, I stated that Kodak holds many patents foundational to digital imaging- not just the CCD.
        They were 1st past the pole when Macs were still using monochrome displays.
        FYI- I deal in facts unless I predicate a statement with IMO or equivalent. Apple suing Kidak over digital imaging is as silly as M$ applying for patents on mouse clicks as an input method.

      2. ANybody notice this poster attacks someone, but fails to use a registered name or a regular non-registered one? Nothing like an ad hominem fanboi attack from Mom’s Garage.

    1. Yes, thats right, KODAK created the benchmarks for future digital imaging, and in fact have never contributed a thing to the worlds imaging technologies….pure trash, overturn them. Honestly, what a ridiculous and uneducated comment.

      The best part about reading posts is all the interesting data and experience people bring to the table. Useless psychobabble like this, find somewhere else to post it, please, or maybe explain much further how you came to that conclusion. LOL anger over something that has so little to do with you usually is a sign of defense.

  5. Comments should be turned off forever on this otherwise excellent website. Or… comments should be accepted from paying subscribers. In this way the mindlessness can be eliminated. People willing to pay to comment should have their real names published. I submit this would raise the level of “discussion” to something interesting that people would come to see. As it stands, you have a youtube level of complete idiocy mucking up your site mate.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.