ITC Rejects Key Kodak Patent As Invalid

from the bye-bye dept

Tue, May 22nd 2012 10:01pm — Mike Masnick

A couple years ago, a massively struggling Kodak decided that perhaps it could cash in by suing more innovative companies for patent infringement. It filed suits against Apple and RIM for patent infringement both in the courts and using the ITC loophole. It appears that going to the ITC may have been a mistake on Kodak's part, as the administrative law judge there has said that the patent is invalid, so it doesn't even matter that some iPhones and Blackberries technically infringe. Of course, this has to hurt even more, considering that Kodak's trying to sell off its patents. If one of the key ones is found to be invalid, that can't be helpful in selling the bundle...

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: blackberry, iphone, itc loophole
Companies: apple, kodak, rim

9 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Nye Kahn, 22 May 2012 @ 10:27pm

Who is this Kodak? A bear?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- That One Guy (profile), 22 May 2012 @ 11:41pm
  
  Re:
  No, bears still have relevance, and people care if they die.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 23 May 2012 @ 1:45am
  
  Re:
  No, that's Kojak.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Groove Tiger (profile), 23 May 2012 @ 11:28am
    
    Re: Re:
    Isn't that the bald police guy?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
trilobug, 23 May 2012 @ 1:41am

True Colors
Hmm...It's a Kodak moment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 May 2012 @ 2:24am
  
  Re: True Colors
  Naah, its a Kojak moment.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Digitari, 23 May 2012 @ 6:06am
    
    Re: Re: True Colors
    Kojak was just a sucker...........
    
    .....Who loves ya Baby!!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
hegemon13, 23 May 2012 @ 9:25am

Shouldn't have gone after the ITC's darlings
Kodak's patent is ridiculously broad, and it needs to be invalidated. But let's face it. If the shoe was one the other foot, with Apple or RIM filing for injunction against Kodak, we know damn well this would have gone the other way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
squirrel (profile), 23 May 2012 @ 11:21am

Time of death: sometime in the very near future.

Goodbye Kodak. I am sad I never got to use Kodachrome film. It's horrible that this historic company died from self-inflicted wounds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]