Jump to content

Waynes

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
  2. Like
    Waynes got a reaction from KnightsFan in Introducing the EOSHD Tim Apple LUT for that washed out nationalist propaganda look   
    Vested interests change Wikipedia pages, and officially so too.   Even pointing out wrongs you get stone walled. Things are written in medical pages from the standpoint of certain people aswell, reinforcing certain conspiratorial conservative behaviours.  The BBC are very left wing biased.  If you are left wing they look neutral, but it has gotten so bad that right wing people loose sight of the non biased things, seeing balanced neutral reporting as even biased.
    What's happening in, America, is an indication of how broken it is, particularly the right.  Bernie Sanders looks a credible opportunity, but he is on the margins there, in a country too right and big business, rather than him being just left of central politics, or a bit left of centre (I don't know enough about him, but he seems to be caring about actual Americans).  Just remember that to Hitler, Starlin, and many dictators, 90% of everybody else looks like extremists, because they were extremists.
  3. Like
    Waynes got a reaction from IronFilm in RED claim victory in Apple RAW patent battle   
    It's worse, applying jpeg2000 to Bayer is obvious and at video rates rediculously obvious.  Plus we discuss using jpeg2000 for Bayer at video rates looking to the higher than 2k resolution era publicly before Red patent or even existence I think, so that in itself would make it unpatentable, as prior public knowledge.  Stuff, I'm the one that suggested to them 4k, do I get to patent everything 4k, of course not!
    They only get to patent one particular type of new Bayer compression algorithm and the unique, new unobvious differences in it.  That's how it is suppose to work.
  4. Like
    Waynes got a reaction from Lars Steenhoff in RED claim victory in Apple RAW patent battle   
    It's worse, applying jpeg2000 to Bayer is obvious and at video rates rediculously obvious.  Plus we discuss using jpeg2000 for Bayer at video rates looking to the higher than 2k resolution era publicly before Red patent or even existence I think, so that in itself would make it unpatentable, as prior public knowledge.  Stuff, I'm the one that suggested to them 4k, do I get to patent everything 4k, of course not!
    They only get to patent one particular type of new Bayer compression algorithm and the unique, new unobvious differences in it.  That's how it is suppose to work.
  5. Like
    Waynes got a reaction from Jimmy G in RED claim victory in Apple RAW patent battle   
    You have to be careful in how you state things, in business, not to sound differently from what you intend.  I'm not saying whatever was intended here.  People could reinterpret things as they like, even potentially misinterpret and ask about the definition of collusion.  You see, it's very difficult in business and you have to be careful in how things are stated.
    So, has there ever been a challenge to this patent that gets to actual re-examination of the terms and context we are interested in.  There is no real victory without that happening on all contexts of relevant objections.
    Here, the panel criticised the submission for not enough, and Apple had an professor expert in Bayer lined up, I thought I read.  Sony settled put of court too, didn't they?  This process should also include an examination for likely problems with a whole patent upon submission of objection independent of the submission but before and after it has been examined, a close check to be sure, then all the notes and conclusions be passed onto the examiner if successful.
     
  6. Thanks
    Waynes got a reaction from IronFilm in RED claim victory in Apple RAW patent battle   
    Joema, thank you.  This is the problem, instead of the claims covering a specific implementation, they can cover everybody else's obvious workmanship.  If it was up to me, there would be jail for certain overreach in patents for everybody, and compensation.  It's ugly.   I'm really sick of the patent system producing outcomes that restrict competition.
    Now, let's look at it, they use obvious terms like resolution and frame rate to define their patent, because it's obvious it is based on prior art as far as compressing Bayer images, so it is obvious that it is obvious.  The judges should have let them through on that grounds alone, and I do hope they try again.  The use of resolution etc to make out its new is rediculous.  It's like patenting walking above 2 kilometres an hour.  If being able to walk just a bit faster was nonobviouse to the human race, we shouldn't have a patent system to patent it in the first place, we wouldn't be able to figure patenting out.  You could try that argument on having prior art as non patentable, and one "obvious" pixel increase in resolution more as suddenly patentable, which if you put in percentage terms, is less than 20, 000th of a percent on top of the natural obvious progressing of increasing resolution.  Strike that part.  This is the issue with the system, once in there, people can claim something, even if that is not strictly what was meant to be claimable by the examiner, and examination has been rubber stamped, and sort it out latter.  If Apple can't get to the point of getting it looked at, then what is the use of doing it that way.  But people have taken out what were obvious patents before and stalked business, even big business, who can't afford to overturn it.  There is even a way of adding things to a patent then use that to extend the whole patent.  That is evil.
    This thing of resisting thorough review of a patent should be allow a preliminary review, in a new way not tried before, then verify and approve a deeper review.  If there is question of wherever the proposed review us on a new way or not, or should be refine, then it goes before the panel.  Once a preliminary review is successful, the deeper review, and preliminary, should be financed by the Patent office, as their mistake.
    Now, let somebody figuratively go and patent walking above the speed of 1km an hour relatively straight upright posture, and demand cameras be put in everybody's houses to clock if they are walking more than 1km an hour after they get up in the morning...
    So, that means you can record raw wirelessly then?
    Well, not really if they keep the size below their 'specs' in the patent.  So, they might possibly divide the image up into two of more separately recorded side by side images.  Which is how CCD's were reading higher resolution images to get around transfer issues producing heard, or how initial Sharp 4k monitors were reading images as four 2k images.
    Red may force the issue, but somebody like Apple could protect it.
  7. Like
    Waynes got a reaction from sanveer in RED claim victory in Apple RAW patent battle   
    Joema, thank you.  This is the problem, instead of the claims covering a specific implementation, they can cover everybody else's obvious workmanship.  If it was up to me, there would be jail for certain overreach in patents for everybody, and compensation.  It's ugly.   I'm really sick of the patent system producing outcomes that restrict competition.
    Now, let's look at it, they use obvious terms like resolution and frame rate to define their patent, because it's obvious it is based on prior art as far as compressing Bayer images, so it is obvious that it is obvious.  The judges should have let them through on that grounds alone, and I do hope they try again.  The use of resolution etc to make out its new is rediculous.  It's like patenting walking above 2 kilometres an hour.  If being able to walk just a bit faster was nonobviouse to the human race, we shouldn't have a patent system to patent it in the first place, we wouldn't be able to figure patenting out.  You could try that argument on having prior art as non patentable, and one "obvious" pixel increase in resolution more as suddenly patentable, which if you put in percentage terms, is less than 20, 000th of a percent on top of the natural obvious progressing of increasing resolution.  Strike that part.  This is the issue with the system, once in there, people can claim something, even if that is not strictly what was meant to be claimable by the examiner, and examination has been rubber stamped, and sort it out latter.  If Apple can't get to the point of getting it looked at, then what is the use of doing it that way.  But people have taken out what were obvious patents before and stalked business, even big business, who can't afford to overturn it.  There is even a way of adding things to a patent then use that to extend the whole patent.  That is evil.
    This thing of resisting thorough review of a patent should be allow a preliminary review, in a new way not tried before, then verify and approve a deeper review.  If there is question of wherever the proposed review us on a new way or not, or should be refine, then it goes before the panel.  Once a preliminary review is successful, the deeper review, and preliminary, should be financed by the Patent office, as their mistake.
    Now, let somebody figuratively go and patent walking above the speed of 1km an hour relatively straight upright posture, and demand cameras be put in everybody's houses to clock if they are walking more than 1km an hour after they get up in the morning...
    So, that means you can record raw wirelessly then?
    Well, not really if they keep the size below their 'specs' in the patent.  So, they might possibly divide the image up into two of more separately recorded side by side images.  Which is how CCD's were reading higher resolution images to get around transfer issues producing heard, or how initial Sharp 4k monitors were reading images as four 2k images.
    Red may force the issue, but somebody like Apple could protect it.
  8. Haha
    Waynes reacted to kye in Sigma Fp first shots - how does internal 8bit RAW compare to external 12bit RAW?   
    Careful..  someone will read this and take it one step further and we'll end up with some 2-bit cinema camera company.  We've had those before and they only leave broken promises and heartbreak in their wake!
  9. Haha
    Waynes got a reaction from Juank in Sigma Fp first shots - how does internal 8bit RAW compare to external 12bit RAW?   
    Was that shot on a 4 bit Cinema camera? 
    We need more 4 bit Cinema cameras.   BM please give us  4 bit Cinema Cameras?
  10. Haha
    Waynes got a reaction from kaylee in Sigma Fp first shots - how does internal 8bit RAW compare to external 12bit RAW?   
    Was that shot on a 4 bit Cinema camera? 
    We need more 4 bit Cinema cameras.   BM please give us  4 bit Cinema Cameras?
  11. Haha
    Waynes reacted to Xavier Plagaro Mussard in Sharp's new 8K M43 camera   
    Shooting 8K and delivering DVDs!!!
×
×
  • Create New...