Comments on: RIM’s Camera BlackBerry Patent: NOT WHAT YOU THINK! http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/ The voice of the BlackBerry community. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 05:22:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: BlackBerry Cool » (Another) New RIM Patent http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-38805 BlackBerry Cool » (Another) New RIM Patent Fri, 28 Jul 2006 13:48:29 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-38805 [...] Well, if there was any doubt previously as to whether or not RIM is hard at work on new BlackBerrys, these flurry of patents prove it. So far we’ve seen patents for camera functionality, spellcheck and better email browsing, and now we have patent application #20060168349, which appears to be designed for faster web browsing through image compression and caching by a proxy server. [...] [...] Well, if there was any doubt previously as to whether or not RIM is hard at work on new BlackBerrys, these flurry of patents prove it. So far we’ve seen patents for camera functionality, spellcheck and better email browsing, and now we have patent application #20060168349, which appears to be designed for faster web browsing through image compression and caching by a proxy server. [...]

]]> By: Geoff http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-37075 Geoff Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:08 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-37075 After submitting my previous post, I went a did a bit more research. The file history for EP1677520 is available online at www.epoline.org (go to Register Plus and enter that number in the search box) Apparently, RIM have filed amended claims which claim a new feature that there is a security system to ensure that communication only takes place between the camera and (your) wireless device. This sort of amendment would probably be acceptable in the US (assuming the amended claim is new) but I'd put money on it being rejected by the EPO as being obvious. G After submitting my previous post, I went a did a bit more research.

The file history for EP1677520 is available online at http://www.epoline.org (go to Register Plus and enter that number in the search box)

Apparently, RIM have filed amended claims which claim a new feature that there is a security system to ensure that communication only takes place between the camera and (your) wireless device.

This sort of amendment would probably be acceptable in the US (assuming the amended claim is new) but I’d put money on it being rejected by the EPO as being obvious.

G

]]> By: Geoff http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-483099 Geoff Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:00 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-483099 After submitting my previous post, I went a did a bit more research. The file history for EP1677520 is available online at www.epoline.org (go to Register Plus and enter that number in the search box) Apparently, RIM have filed amended claims which claim a new feature that there is a security system to ensure that communication only takes place between the camera and (your) wireless device. This sort of amendment would probably be acceptable in the US (assuming the amended claim is new) but I'd put money on it being rejected by the EPO as being obvious. G After submitting my previous post, I went a did a bit more research.

The file history for EP1677520 is available online at http://www.epoline.org (go to Register Plus and enter that number in the search box)

Apparently, RIM have filed amended claims which claim a new feature that there is a security system to ensure that communication only takes place between the camera and (your) wireless device.

This sort of amendment would probably be acceptable in the US (assuming the amended claim is new) but I’d put money on it being rejected by the EPO as being obvious.

G

]]> By: Geoff http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-37061 Geoff Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:28:38 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-37061 This is a reply to ACME Photography As far as I can tell, there's nothing different between claim 1 of this patent application and the Camera Control Software for the Nikon D2X. However, the software you link to has apparently only come out this year, whereas this patent application was filed in December 2004. You cannot invalidate a patent (or have a patent application rejected) based on prior art that was published after the application was filed. Instead, you have to find something from before December 2004. Apparently, the "Nikon Capture 4 Camera Control" software was released in 2003, ( http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=276&productNr=25291 ) but judging from the website, it doesn't have full wireless functionality. If you can show that this software has full wireless functionality and enables wireless signals, including image data, to pass between camera and computer, you should send the evidence to RIM's patent attorneys: ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT 600 GRANT STREET, 44TH FLOOR, PITTSBURGH, PA 15219, US They are legally obliged to submit prior art that they know of to the USPTO for review or any granted patent is potentially invalid. Make sure you can show without question that the publication of the prior art was before 30 December 2004, though! As for the question posed by the writer of this article: I don't understand where the confusion lies. They are trying to patent something that will control a camera wirelessly (or a wirelessly controlled camera). I don't see that there's any legalese in the abstract at all. I've also just found that RIM filed a European Patent Application on the same day as the US application. The results of the search by the EPO are available online http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1677520&F=0&QPN=EP1677520 Or run a search for: EP1677520 if that link doesn't work. Looks like the EPO think that pretty much all of RIM's claims are invalid, so the chances of a granted patent (in Europe at least) are looking small. G This is a reply to ACME Photography

As far as I can tell, there’s nothing different between claim 1 of this patent application and the Camera Control Software for the Nikon D2X.

However, the software you link to has apparently only come out this year, whereas this patent application was filed in December 2004. You cannot invalidate a patent (or have a patent application rejected) based on prior art that was published after the application was filed. Instead, you have to find something from before December 2004.

Apparently, the “Nikon Capture 4 Camera Control” software was released in 2003, ( http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=276&productNr=25291 ) but judging from the website, it doesn’t have full wireless functionality. If you can show that this software has full wireless functionality and enables wireless signals, including image data, to pass between camera and computer, you should send the evidence to RIM’s patent attorneys:
ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT
600 GRANT STREET, 44TH FLOOR, PITTSBURGH, PA 15219, US

They are legally obliged to submit prior art that they know of to the USPTO for review or any granted patent is potentially invalid. Make sure you can show without question that the publication of the prior art was before 30 December 2004, though!

As for the question posed by the writer of this article: I don’t understand where the confusion lies. They are trying to patent something that will control a camera wirelessly (or a wirelessly controlled camera). I don’t see that there’s any legalese in the abstract at all.

I’ve also just found that RIM filed a European Patent Application on the same day as the US application. The results of the search by the EPO are available online

http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1677520&F=0&QPN=EP1677520

Or run a search for: EP1677520 if that link doesn’t work.

Looks like the EPO think that pretty much all of RIM’s claims are invalid, so the chances of a granted patent (in Europe at least) are looking small.

G

]]> By: Geoff http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-483098 Geoff Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:28:00 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-483098 This is a reply to ACME Photography As far as I can tell, there's nothing different between claim 1 of this patent application and the Camera Control Software for the Nikon D2X. However, the software you link to has apparently only come out this year, whereas this patent application was filed in December 2004. You cannot invalidate a patent (or have a patent application rejected) based on prior art that was published after the application was filed. Instead, you have to find something from before December 2004. Apparently, the "Nikon Capture 4 Camera Control" software was released in 2003, ( http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=276&productNr=25291 ) but judging from the website, it doesn't have full wireless functionality. If you can show that this software has full wireless functionality and enables wireless signals, including image data, to pass between camera and computer, you should send the evidence to RIM's patent attorneys: ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT 600 GRANT STREET, 44TH FLOOR, PITTSBURGH, PA 15219, US They are legally obliged to submit prior art that they know of to the USPTO for review or any granted patent is potentially invalid. Make sure you can show without question that the publication of the prior art was before 30 December 2004, though! As for the question posed by the writer of this article: I don't understand where the confusion lies. They are trying to patent something that will control a camera wirelessly (or a wirelessly controlled camera). I don't see that there's any legalese in the abstract at all. I've also just found that RIM filed a European Patent Application on the same day as the US application. The results of the search by the EPO are available online http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1677520&F=0&QPN=EP1677520 Or run a search for: EP1677520 if that link doesn't work. Looks like the EPO think that pretty much all of RIM's claims are invalid, so the chances of a granted patent (in Europe at least) are looking small. G This is a reply to ACME Photography

As far as I can tell, there’s nothing different between claim 1 of this patent application and the Camera Control Software for the Nikon D2X.

However, the software you link to has apparently only come out this year, whereas this patent application was filed in December 2004. You cannot invalidate a patent (or have a patent application rejected) based on prior art that was published after the application was filed. Instead, you have to find something from before December 2004.

Apparently, the “Nikon Capture 4 Camera Control” software was released in 2003, ( http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=276&productNr=25291 ) but judging from the website, it doesn’t have full wireless functionality. If you can show that this software has full wireless functionality and enables wireless signals, including image data, to pass between camera and computer, you should send the evidence to RIM’s patent attorneys:
ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT
600 GRANT STREET, 44TH FLOOR, PITTSBURGH, PA 15219, US

They are legally obliged to submit prior art that they know of to the USPTO for review or any granted patent is potentially invalid. Make sure you can show without question that the publication of the prior art was before 30 December 2004, though!

As for the question posed by the writer of this article: I don’t understand where the confusion lies. They are trying to patent something that will control a camera wirelessly (or a wirelessly controlled camera). I don’t see that there’s any legalese in the abstract at all.

I’ve also just found that RIM filed a European Patent Application on the same day as the US application. The results of the search by the EPO are available online

http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1677520&F=0&QPN=EP1677520

Or run a search for: EP1677520 if that link doesn’t work.

Looks like the EPO think that pretty much all of RIM’s claims are invalid, so the chances of a granted patent (in Europe at least) are looking small.

G

]]> By: Acme Photography http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-36822 Acme Photography Fri, 07 Jul 2006 22:31:38 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-36822 What makes this any different than what Nikon has for it's pro cameras. With the Nikon D2X you can attach a wifi device to the camera which sends the images to a PC wirelessly. Also from the PC you can wirelessly control the camera and capture frames remotely. http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2006/0601_02.htm Same thing as blackberry's patent right?.... and it's already being dong What makes this any different than what Nikon has for it’s pro cameras. With the Nikon D2X you can attach a wifi device to the camera which sends the images to a PC wirelessly. Also from the PC you can wirelessly control the camera and capture frames remotely.

http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2006/0601_02.htm

Same thing as blackberry’s patent right?…. and it’s already being dong

]]> By: Acme Photography http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-483097 Acme Photography Fri, 07 Jul 2006 22:31:00 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-483097 What makes this any different than what Nikon has for it's pro cameras. With the Nikon D2X you can attach a wifi device to the camera which sends the images to a PC wirelessly. Also from the PC you can wirelessly control the camera and capture frames remotely. http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2006/0601_02.htm Same thing as blackberry's patent right?.... and it's already being dong What makes this any different than what Nikon has for it’s pro cameras. With the Nikon D2X you can attach a wifi device to the camera which sends the images to a PC wirelessly. Also from the PC you can wirelessly control the camera and capture frames remotely.

http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2006/0601_02.htm

Same thing as blackberry’s patent right?…. and it’s already being dong

]]> By: BlackBerry Cool » Weekend Contest: “Is this what you want from RIM?” http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-36757 BlackBerry Cool » Weekend Contest: “Is this what you want from RIM?” Fri, 07 Jul 2006 15:45:31 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-36757 [...] With today’s release of RIM’s patent application for a BlackBerry-controlled digital camera, a number of questions have been flying around the BlackBerry Cool watercooler. First off is the question of whether or not we’re happy with RIM continuing to walk the line between consumer and enterprise needs. Certainly, if this functionality arrives in enterprise-focused BlackBerrys, it will be a major boon for companies who need it while still allowing security minded organizations (we’re looking at you, NSA) to use the device. But is it enough? Will this type of camera integration ever appeal to the consumer market (we say no)? Do you believe that this is only one phase of RIM’s plan (keep in mind that just because this patents out there, it doesn’t mean that RIM isn’t also working on patents for consumer BlackBerrys with built-in cameras)? [...] [...] With today’s release of RIM’s patent application for a BlackBerry-controlled digital camera, a number of questions have been flying around the BlackBerry Cool watercooler. First off is the question of whether or not we’re happy with RIM continuing to walk the line between consumer and enterprise needs. Certainly, if this functionality arrives in enterprise-focused BlackBerrys, it will be a major boon for companies who need it while still allowing security minded organizations (we’re looking at you, NSA) to use the device. But is it enough? Will this type of camera integration ever appeal to the consumer market (we say no)? Do you believe that this is only one phase of RIM’s plan (keep in mind that just because this patents out there, it doesn’t mean that RIM isn’t also working on patents for consumer BlackBerrys with built-in cameras)? [...]

]]> By: Nick http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-36736 Nick Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:05:30 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-36736 This looks like my old 957. This looks like my old 957.

]]> By: Nick http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/rims-camera-blackberry-patent-not-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-483096 Nick Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:05:00 +0000 http://www.blackberrycool.com/2006/07/07/001980/#comment-483096 This looks like my old 957. This looks like my old 957.

]]>