j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Since I'm patenting the following 'novel' device, perhaps we can enter into a cross licensing agreement, rather than have me initiated a FTC ban on such kanuckistanian imports.
FTC ruling verdict on them leds.
- Thread starter Norman99
- Start date
Since I'm patenting the following 'novel' device, perhaps we can enter into a cross licensing agreement, rather than have me initiated a FTC ban on such kanuckistanian imports.
bclighting
Well-known member
There is a difference between actual IP and nonsensical patents for something that was previously being done. You're right though, they can't claim to be the king of all things LED. That little company that pretty much started LED entertainment lighting, Color Kinetics, is now owned by Philips.
BrianMurphy
Veteran
Since I'm patenting the following 'novel' device, perhaps we can enter into a cross licensing agreement, rather than have me initiated a FTC ban on such kanuckistanian imports.
Sounds good! Perhaps we can combine forces and take over the Pony clamp market too.
Norman99
Well-known member
I'sm still not 100% clear on what the ban is for. Please, can anyone who has that knowledge explain what exactly is the issue. From what I gathered, and I must quote from what is out there:
Again from: THIRD PARAGRAPH http://patentfreeled.com/the-verdict-is-in/
“Contrary to the substantial amount of misinformation surrounding this case, the General Exclusion Order will not affect the importation of emergency lighting, cellular phones, automobile taillights, or LED bulbs themselves. It also does not affect other forms of LED lighting used for film, video or photography such as RGB and Remote Phosphor technologies. It simply prohibits the importation into the United States of LED lighting products for film, video or photography that infringe certain claims of the Litepanels patents without the patent holder’s consent.“
Either I am stupid or cannot read properly.
Can anyone see the word “importation“ in that statement or am I also blind.???
Again from: THIRD PARAGRAPH http://patentfreeled.com/the-verdict-is-in/
“Contrary to the substantial amount of misinformation surrounding this case, the General Exclusion Order will not affect the importation of emergency lighting, cellular phones, automobile taillights, or LED bulbs themselves. It also does not affect other forms of LED lighting used for film, video or photography such as RGB and Remote Phosphor technologies. It simply prohibits the importation into the United States of LED lighting products for film, video or photography that infringe certain claims of the Litepanels patents without the patent holder’s consent.“
Either I am stupid or cannot read properly.
Can anyone see the word “importation“ in that statement or am I also blind.???
keylight
Veteran
Yes, I see it. I've highlighted it for you. The word is in there twice, but the first time is LEDs for other uses. :laugh:
The questions is I suppose, which claims belonging to Litepanels. Seems to leave room open for the importation of some uses for film, video, photo that won't infringe on "certain claims".
Norman99
Well-known member
Hmm.... pages 44 and 45 do look interesting. So they can supply all the needs with their products along with the licensees , yes, with the licensees that will pay the piper ? Also a single white led used in a lamp is excluded. Wow. Why also not 2 white leds ? Oh, I get it, that would be a “panel design with a plurality of them“. Sheesh !
http://patentfreeled.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Litepanels-document-1.pdf
http://patentfreeled.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Litepanels-document-1.pdf
maranfilms
Veteran
haha, that awesome
This is a very simple patent to get thrown out. Simply show where a light panel of LED's was used or offered for sale to light a film scene prior to 2003. Obviously no one else thought of it before then or they would simply show prior art in the public domain.
Things are very obvious once you've seen it done. Before then, obviously, no one can prove they strung a group of LEDs into a lighting fixture for photography, film or TV.
Kudos to Lightpanels for going after those infringing on their patent.
Cheers,
Pete
Things are very obvious once you've seen it done. Before then, obviously, no one can prove they strung a group of LEDs into a lighting fixture for photography, film or TV.
Kudos to Lightpanels for going after those infringing on their patent.
Cheers,
Pete
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
Just import and sell them as emergency lights and call it a day.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Yesh, it is well known among emergency crews, that a CRI above 90 is required for proper evaluation of injuries, in order to apply the appropriate response.