AppleInsider StaffThe decision reversed parts of an earlier ruling in the high-profile case, sending Kodak's shares into a 20% free-fall late Thursday afternoon. Other parts of the earlier ruling were sent to be reviewed by an administrative law judge. A final decision is expected by Aug 30th.
Kodak, which had previously had the same patents claims upheld in suits against LG and Samsung, was hoping to score another lucrative win to strengthen its patent portfolio that has increasingly become one of its prime sources of income.
The commission did however rule that Apple and RIM were guilty of infringing on a Kodak patent related to "initiating capture of a still image while previewing a motion image," and another under the commission's revised definition of "at least three different colors." The comission also reportedly revised definitions for "motion processor" and "still processor" and asked the administrative judge to make a final decision on whether Kodak's patent was infringed with those changes.
Two of Kodak's three main businesses lost money last year as revenues fell to $7.2 billion, or roughly half the amount it made in 2005. Over the past twelve months, the company's stock has responded by bleeding nearly half of its market value.
Faced with the decline of the camera film market, Kodak has turned to its extensive patent portfolio as a source of income while it struggles to transition into a digital imaging company. It successfully licenses its digital imaging technology to about 30 companies, including handset makers such as LG, Motorola, Nokia and Sony Ericsson.
Though the six-member ITC commission that ruled Thursday is unable to order monetary damages, it has the authority to block imports of products that are found to infringe upon U.S. patents. As such, the threat of an import ban often motivates companies to settle.
Chief Executive Antonio Perez had previously stated that he believed Kodak could receive more than $1 billion in such settlement royalty revenue if it could achieve a victory in the latest litigation, which covers methods of preview digital images similar to ones used on the iPhone and BlackBerry.
-m.jpg)
Bon Adamson
Christine McKee
Marko Zivkovic
Malcolm Owen
Andrew Orr
William Gallagher
25 Comments
When a company can't innovate anymore it just sues everyone and their mother.
Make a new revolutionary product, Kodak!
May 23rd? of which year
Come on Kodak, you used to be so much better than this. Can you say Kodachrome....
I guess they could always pull a Nortel and sell off all their patents... of course, they'd also have to permanently shut the doors.
When a company can't innovate anymore it just sues everyone and their mother.
Make a new revolutionary product, Kodak!
According to another article on the ruling, Kodak did come out the winner on one of the three patent claims, while another was throw back to be argued again.
According to another article on the ruling, Kodak did come out the winner on one of the three patent claims, while another was throw back to be argued again.
I think it was all thrown back to the ALJ effectively, as I understand it Kodak is still in a worse position than they were just before the ALJ ruled the first time. I'm still trying to get my head completely around it though.
The way that Foss-patents explains it, the ITC have decided that the ALJ was incorrect in interpretation of some terms, and has clarified how those terms have to be interpreted, then sent the whole patent back to him/her/them/it? This means that some of the reasons that the patent was found invalid and uninfringed may no longer apply, but ultimately it only takes one reason, so that may not be enough for Kodak.
If there is any serious chance of Kodak losing this patent then they'll be desparate to settle rather than risk the loss of income from other trolled smartphone makers. Sounds very likely we'll get a settlement of this soon for an underermined sum that Kodak will crow as a victory while Apple & RIM try not to look too happy.