Sony now suing RED!

E

evilthought

Well-known member

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/show-highend/


On April 5, 2013, Sony Corporation (“Sony”) sued Red Digital Cinema (“Red”) for infringing 7 of Sony’s patents in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Sony believes that the Red ONE, EPIC and SCARLET cameras, various digital still and motion camera modules, and various accessories such as the REDMOTE infringe our patents. Sony is seeking both money damages and an injunction to stop the continued sale of Red’s infringing products. Sony makes significant investments into the research & development of technology related to the cinema camera industry and intends to protect those investments against companies that infringe our patents.
 
Hehe... sounds like forcing Sony to go through checking their development because of the RED suit, has lead them to realise that it was actually RED who was infringing rights.

Wonder if Sony could actually kill RED by countering REDs suit and winning their own...?
 
Even the RED fans on their forum weren't happy with the RED lawsuit, the whole thing, like the Apple/Samsung case is an unnecessary distraction for all of these Companies.
 
legrevedotcom said:
Hehe... sounds like forcing Sony to go through checking their development because of the RED suit, has lead them to realise that it was actually RED who was infringing rights.
Click to expand...

that Sony brings a counter suit is to be expected. it isn't an indication of patent infringement, just an adversarial relationship.
 
ya know, my first thought when reading this was: Wait, they cite the red one in this.... if i were a jury member/defendant, i'd be wondering why these infringements weren't brought up years ago?
 
Thomas Kist said:
Only the lawyers are winning here.
Click to expand...

The consumers (us) win too. Fierce competition brings us the latest greatest toys that keep getting cheaper. ;)

i was wondering when Sony was going to say "wait a minute...didnt WE make the first digital cinema camera?"

I can already see it at NAB 2015: "Sony announces the new acquisition of Red Digital Camera, promptly fires Jim Jannard." Lol
 
Last edited:
Sound like we got the corporate version of, "My winky is bigger than your winky" going on in the US courts. I would bet that Sony has a pretty big winky! ... and deeper pockets than RED.
 
It makes you wonder about the real purpose of the patents that Red filed. They were late, they seemed to be existing art and very vague.

I wonder if Sony approached Red about licensing fees for their patents. The Sony patents are far more numerous, far more specific and older. Any decent lawyer, or even an interest lay person would draw that conclusion.

Jim J is usually excellent at manipulating public opinion and whipping up emotions. My flash of insight is that may have Red filed these patents, at least some of them, so they can portray themselves as the victims and the under dogs to both the public and their fan base.
 
David G. Smith said:
Sound like we got the corporate version of, "My winky is bigger than your winky" going on in the US courts. I would bet that Sony has a pretty big winky! ... and deeper pockets than RED.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't count on it. Jim Jannard is a billionaire, and he takes this kind of stuff very personally. He might decide to spend whatever it takes to win (provided he can win). Sony has been in a financially precarious position and may not be able to devote as much money as Jannard can. They probably contersued to try to force a settlement on terms that would permit both parties to walk (not limp or crawl) out of the courtroom.
 
Tzedekh said:
I wouldn't count on it. Jim Jannard is a billionaire, and he takes this kind of stuff very personally. He might decide to spend whatever it takes to win (provided he can win). Sony has been in a financially precarious position and may not be able to devote as much money as Jannard can. They probably contersued to try to force a settlement on terms that would permit both parties to walk (not limp or crawl) out of the courtroom.
Click to expand...

Sony is a massive multinational corporation with a full time legal department that probably has more people than total RED employees. In any long term legal battle of attrition (which seems likely the way this will go) it is difficult to see RED coming out of this with anything more than legal fees.

Just for reference--Jannard's net worth in 2012 was 2.8 billion according to Forbes, Sony's revenue for just the last fiscal year was something like 80 billion.
 
Last edited:
I had a feeling this would be Sony's move. They plan to either

a) have Red drop suit in exchange for Sony dropping as well

or

b) going all out after Red

Either way my heart goes out to all the smaller employees at Red Digital who are giving it their all.
 
starcentral said:
The timing couldn't be better. Congrats Sony, knock 'em dead.
Click to expand...

Wow. Have times changed that much? From just a few short years ago, where Red was the savior of indie filmmaking, the renegade that was going to revolutionize the industry and break up the stranglehold on technology that the evil cartel of Japanese companies held... now we seriously have someone ROOTING for Sony (Sony! Of all companies!) to kill Red dead...

Starcentral, you win the award for the most unexpected post I've ever seen on DVXUser...
 
David G. Smith said:
I would bet that Sony has ... deeper pockets than RED.
Click to expand...
Maybe today. But lawsuits drag on for years. And every day that goes by, Red has more and more money, and Sony has less and less. Sony's losing money at an absolutely stunning rate. I don't think this fight is quite the mismatch that some apparently believe.
 
LyleGorch said:
Just for reference--Jannard's net worth in 2012 was 2.8 billion according to Forbes, Sony's revenue for just the last fiscal year was something like 80 billion.
Click to expand...
Their revenues were big, but their expenses were even bigger. Sony's been hemorrhaging money for years.

Point in case: in 2006, Jannard was worth $1.4 billion. In the last six years, he has doubled his value, to $2.8 billion.
In 2006, Sony was worth $45 billion. Today, they're worth $16 billion, or about a third of what they were. They lost $6 billion last year alone.

Further, you need cash to pay bills (like lawyer bills). Sony used to have cash reserves of $20 billion and debt of $13.5 billion (i.e., they could have paid off their debt and had $6.5 billion in cash left over). That was just in 2010. Today, they can't do that. Their cash has shrunk to the point where they're actually $610 million in the hole. They can't even pay the debts they currently have. And they have been losing money four four straight years. They haven't actually turned a profit in four years, they're net losers of money, every day that goes by the company is worth less than it was the day before.

Not saying they're not a big player, but -- it's 2013, not 2003, and this is a hugely different Sony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top