Litepanels sues to stop all imports of LED Lighting!

LITEPANELS are good quality. They don't break as easy as some knock offs. They have bulbs that don't change color temperature over time. The only thing I dislike more than light brand light is battery brand battery and even more so, charger brand charger. There's stuff out there with no UPC code, warranty, parts availability and some of these companies even have booths at NAB.
 
goetzpd said:
LITEPANELS are good quality. They don't break as easy as some knock offs. They have bulbs that don't change color temperature over time. The only thing I dislike more than light brand light is battery brand battery and even more so, charger brand charger. There's stuff out there with no UPC code, warranty, parts availability and some of these companies even have booths at NAB.
Click to expand...


So what's your point?
 
Very interesting ! I guess that only applies to "panel/donut" type/shape of fixture with a "plurality" of leds in an array/cluster configuration for use in the video/broadcast/film/photography industry/application from what I read.
What about a led light that is not panel shaped and does not use a "plurality" of leds. ???
 
goetzpd said:
LITEPANELS are good quality. They don't break as easy as some knock offs. They have bulbs that don't change color temperature over time. The only thing I dislike more than light brand light is battery brand battery and even more so, charger brand charger. There's stuff out there with no UPC code, warranty, parts availability and some of these companies even have booths at NAB.
Click to expand...

LOL, UPC code? Can you imagine that somehow we have managed to sell thousands of LED units and none of them had a UPC code on them? I don't think I have to comment too much on your post, it kind of speaks for itself and is trying to steer away from the topic the OP created here. Just for the record Cool Lights USA is named as one of the 15 or so respondents in this case and we are also a sponsor here. You are a Litepanels dealer according to your website. If you've got something to say to any of us, go ahead get all your frustrations out. I see in the complaint that Litepanels says their dealers are pressuring them into a move like this. Anyway, I'll relay whatever you want to say as a dealer and official spokesman for Litepanels to the other respondents (and their representatives) in the case.
 
Last edited:
LITEPANELS are good quality. They don't break as easy as some knock offs. They have bulbs that don't change color temperature over time. The only thing I dislike more than light brand light is battery brand battery and even more so, charger brand charger. There's stuff out there with no UPC code, warranty, parts availability and some of these companies even have booths at NAB.
Click to expand...

Is that supposed to make any sense? It is (supposed to be) a free market. If you don't like something, then don't buy/sell it. You haven't made any points with that kind of attitude.
 
Litepanels is owned by Vitec Group. Here are all of the fine businesses owned by Vitec:

- Anton/Bauer
- Autoscript
- The Camera Store
- Litepanels
- Microwave Service Company
- Nucomm
- OConnor
- Petrol Bags
- RF Central
- Sachtler
- Vinten
- Vinten Radamec
- Avenger
- Brilliant Stages
- Colorama
- Gitzo
- Kata
- Lastolite
- Litec
- Manfrotto
- Manfrotto Distribution
- National Geographic (manufactured & distributed under licence)
- Tomcat
- Bexel

I want you to know that every dollar you spend with these companies is helping in this fight against inexpensive lighting and no doubt other similar products. Here's a quote from the Vitec 2010 Annual Report:

The Group is at risk from low-cost competitors who may sell similar products at lower prices, particularly for high volume items such as the simpler photographic tripods. While the Group also sources those cheaper products from lower cost countries, it combats this threat by patenting its technologies wherever possible and taking action against any infringement, continuously innovating its products and employing significant marketing and distribution capabilities.
 
They, (LP), did not invent the led as much as they did not invent the lightbulb. They just have a patent of the idea/concept of grouping a bunch of small lights that by the addative/collective nature of light will produce more brightness and more diffusion as well. Just simple laws of physics that have been used as far back as the invention of the candle. Tale a bunch of candles. put them close together and light them all up to produce more light. Does that mean that someone can take an existing technology ( not his/her invention ) like a simple candle and patent the idea that collectively they can be used for a wide area illumination and anyone importing or selling multiple candles to light up a wide area is an infringement on their patent ? If LP had specified the common filament bulbs as their source of light instead of the leds, would they have been granted the patent soley on the grouping METHOD/CONCEPT/IDEA used and the fixture shape as being unique ? Can I take a simple fish hook (existing technology) and patent the METHOD/CONCEPT/IDEA ( that's if none has done it yet) that by stringing a bunch of them together will allow one to catch more fish as the hooks will cover a wide area, and anyone importing/selling them is liable ? Ancient fishermen have been doing just that for centuries.
 
Well if that is their "business plan", then I am writing off Vitec, Litepanels, et.al. as greedy vultures apparently incapable of selling goods on their own merits.
They seem to have the same "business plan" as Monster Cable who are infamous for sicing their law firm on anybody with the name "Monster", including everyone you can think of including the soft drink and the film.

An example of Monster's despicable antics can be seen in this rather entertaining website. They picked on the wrong guy and slunk away with their tails between their legs. http://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm
 
Cool Lights said:
I want you to know that every dollar you spend with these companies is helping in this fight against inexpensive lighting and no doubt other similar products. Here's a quote from the Vitec 2010 Annual Report:

.
Click to expand...

We sold all our Litepanels quite a while ago. The price performance ratio went out of the window and the service is a disaster.
We had quite some isuues since they are sold to Vitec.
Today you can have much better quality panels, at a much better price.
Litepanels was resting on their laurels much too long.

Looks like they following Apple in the trivial Patent-Troll business now.


Frank
 
Postmaster said:
Looks like they following Apple in the trivial Patent-Troll business now.

Frank
Click to expand...

Exactly. These days It's hard to tell if Apple is an electronics company or a law firm. Pathetic.

Richard, thanks for the list of companies owned by Vitec. I had no idea that they were that expansive.

I had budgeted for a new Oconnor matte box this year- nix that idea.

This whole bit makes me feel even better about ordering one of your 1200w LED units last week for a show I'm helping to launch. Four Coollight LED units on the set and counting :-).

Vitec- you suck.
 
Last edited:
Of course they wouldn't want you to know all these details. Its very awkward after all. A company that reported over 300m UK pounds (at current exchange rate about $500m ) in gross sales for 2010 attacking a bunch of companies that together make a small fraction of that every year. And should have to explain why they don't attack companies like Arri, Dedo or Mole that are also making LED Products. Couldn't have anything to do with the size of the companies could it?

Doesn't make for good publicity except among those pre-disposed to buy from that company anyway, dealers and rental agencies as well. Particularly difficult for their dealers who effectively said they wanted some help in eroding sales on the one hand, now they look like they're trying to put a gun to your head to buy from them rather than from us. Maybe they thought all this would be done quietly and without publicity?
 
This just sort of sounds like patent trolling. Nothing too new. Oh well. I think if anything you should be upset with the patent office or whomever for allowing stuff like this to go on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top