Japanese court overturns Red RAW video patent
79 points by anigbrowl 5 hours ago | 12 comments
dannyw 5 hours ago
Thank god. The actual patent (roughly; I researched it myself, but a few years ago so memory fuzzy) involves compressing frames/video before debayering which makes the streams more easily compressible; instead of after debayering, and as part of a camera (internal RAW). Yeah.
replyWistar 3 hours ago
In the past 15 years, I have purchased five Lumix cameras including the new L10 (which I have yet to receive). I like their cameras a lot. The dedication to pursue this battle is another reason I am certain to buy more.
replydagmx 2 hours ago
Unless I’ve missed it; Lumix has nothing to do with this long standing patent battle. Could you elaborate on the supposed relationship?
replytim-- 2 hours ago
Lumix is Panasonic, the people who fought this battle in court.
replyDon't the Lumix cameras support 4k recording with the Apple ProRES codec? https://www.dpreview.com/news/3429948804/apple-loses-patent-...
KennyBlanken 2 hours ago
....what? Lumix and Red cameras have almost no market overlap. Only one model series even comes close to Red's cheapest camera.
replywmf 4 hours ago
This is a terrible patent (it's basically a list of features) and unfortunately Red was able to milk it for almost 20 years.
reply
So what exactly is patentable here? Or is this the bone of contention here?