Neil Hughes
Last Friday, Cayman Islands-based Imperium Holdings filed a complaint against Apple, Kyocera, LG, Motorola, Nokia, RIM and Sony. The seven companies have been accused of violating five patents related to picture taking and processing on smartphones.
The lawsuit was filed last week in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. Patent infringement suits are frequently filed in that jurisdiction, in hopes of a more favorable outcome.
The five patents named in the suit are:
- U.S. Patent No. 7,750,949: Automatic flicker frequency detection device and method
- U.S. Patent No. 6,838,651: High sensitivity snap shot CMOS image sensor
- U.S. Patent No. 6,838,715: CMOS image sensor arrangement with reduced pixel light shadowing
- U.S. Patent No. 7,064,768: Bad pixel correction while preserving features
- U.S. Patent No. 7,109,535: Semiconductor device for isolating a photodiode to reduce junction leakage
Specifically cited in Imperium's complaint in alleged violation of the patents is Apple's iPhone 3G. However, the lawsuit notes that the allegations are "not limited to" that device, released in 2008.
Imperium has asked the court for damages related to alleged infringement of the five patents in question. It also seeks a permanent injunction prohibiting Apple and the other six named companies from engaging in further alleged infringement of those patents.
Wesley Hilliard
Andrew O'Hara
Malcolm Owen
Christine McKee
Andrew Orr
26 Comments
Apple and other leading smartphone manufacturers, including Motorola, Research in Motion and Nokia, are targeted in a new patent infringement lawsuit related to integrated cameras.
Last Friday, Cayman Islands-based Imperium Holdings filed a complaint against Apple, Kyocera, LG, Motorola, Nokia, RIM and Sony. The seven companies have been accused of violating five patents related to picture taking and processing on smartphones.
The lawsuit was filed last week in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. Patent infringement suits are frequently filed in that jurisdiction, in hopes of a more favorable outcome.
The five patents named in the suit are:
U.S. Patent No. 7,750,949: Automatic flicker frequency detection device and method
U.S. Patent No. 6,838,651: High sensitivity snap shot CMOS image sensor
U.S. Patent No. 6,838,715: CMOS image sensor arrangement with reduced pixel light shadowing
U.S. Patent No. 7,064,768: Bad pixel correction while preserving features
U.S. Patent No. 7,109,535: Semiconductor device for isolating a photodiode to reduce junction leakageSpecifically cited in Imperium's complaint in alleged violation of the patents is Apple's iPhone 3G. However, the lawsuit notes that the allegations are "not limited to" that device, released in 2008.
Imperium has asked the court for damages related to alleged infringement of the five patents in question. It also seeks a permanent injunction prohibiting Apple and the other six named companies from engaging in further alleged infringement of those patents.
What damages did these guys suffer? Sounds like yet another grifting attempt.
I suppose the devil is in the details - but those sound to me like low level component functions - meaning any patent checking or royalties etc should be handled at the component manuafacturer level - not the system integrator or operating system vendor level.
In other words - if Goodyear has a patent on a process by which rubber is vulcanized into a tire - and Bridestone infringes on that patent - then Goodyear should sue Bridgestone - not Ford and Chevy ad Honda and Toyota for using Bridgestone tires.
Oh no!
I still use a 3G as my primary phone! I hope no functionality will be taken away from it, at least until I can buy a white iPhone 5...
Info on the Patent Holders:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7750949.html
PDF Copy: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7750949.pdf
Assignee Corporation: http://www.avagotech.com/pages/corpo...mpany_history/
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6838651.html
PDF Copy: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6838651.pdf
Assignee Corporation: http://www.esstech.com/
...Either these corporations are leveraging this Imperial Holdings IP to do their legal work or they sold their patents to them which begs one to question, if true, the value of the complaint if their original creators saw no value in it.
How does ones determine that there is infringement without first reverse engineering the devices? And isn't that itself illegal?