• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

'Amazon' patented lighting setup

Hi Folks,

Apparently the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPAT) saw fit to grant a patent for a lighting setup that has probably been used by many before (=prior art), but perhaps not documented as such, shooting objects against a seamless white background.

This means that using such a lighting setup without express permission will violate the Amazon patent and one may be prosecuted for violating Amazon's exclusive rights to use ''their' intellectual property.

I don't know what the world has come to by allowing such a patent in the first place, but it is bad news anyway, unless one is a patent troll (someone who makes their money by litigation over frivolous patent claims).

Here are some links covering the idiocy:
http://www.slrlounge.com/amazon-patents-basics-studio-photography-photographing-seamless-white
http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/amazon-awarded-questionable-studio-lighting-patent/#!OnAZD
http://www.geek.com/news/amazon-successfully-patents-photography-against-a-white-background-1593582/

Anyway, something to be aware of, and something to be contested. Steven Colbert has also taken his humorous stab at it.

Cheers,
Bart
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Bart,

Is this perhaps just a humorous swipe against patenting all sorts of ordinary things such as the genomes of bacteria that nobody invented? Could be that there lawyers are giving a message to other mega companies about the pointlessness of contrived patent lawsuits that just put n drag progress.

Asher
 
Bart,

Is this perhaps just a humorous swipe against patenting all sorts of ordinary things such as the genomes of bacteria that nobody invented? Could be that there lawyers are giving a message to other mega companies about the pointlessness of contrived patent lawsuits that just put n drag progress.

Hi Asher,

I think it is more serious than that.

As a pano-stitcher since a long time (using cut-and-paste prints and later filmscans), I only too well remember how Prof. Helmut Dersch, the publisher of the free Panotools was bullied out of further developing or even publishing his toolset for Panorama Stitching, by the litigation threats from the patent holders of a specific 360 degree VR device (IPIX, who later attempted to claim ownership of all fish-eye images). His free software made it too easy to achieve the same or better results. Prof. Dersch decided remove the fish-eye stitching capability from his tools and to close his website, and pull-out of the further development, but he published the source code of his tools!

If he hadn't released the source code then, we wouldn't have the amazing Pano-stitching tools we have today (PTGUI was originally a GUI wrapper based on the PTtools from Dersch, although now a completely new tool).

There must be many more who were litigated out of existence, and thus progress was halted.

I'm not against all patents, they serve a good purpose - to allow an inventor to recuperate (some of) the development cost, which also invites others to do research because they know they can be compensated for their efforts. I'm just against patents that attract patent trolls, companies that buy start-ups with the only goal to milk the revenue from a patent through litigation (not by developing its concepts further), the frivolous ones are the more profitable it seems.

Cheers,
Bart
 
Top