Looks like kodak is on a lawsuit binge. They also sued apple for the same infringement. Perhaps they are hoping to capture a royalty stream now that they sell about 1 roll of film a year. The sad part is that they had a head start in digital imaging, and threw it away...

Possibly and possibly not relevant, a page from 2000 - SHUTTERFLY PARTNERS WITH KODAK TO OFFER FILM DEVELOPING AND SCANNING SERVICES (not my caps)
http://ir.shutterfly.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=202256

Wall St Journal 15th Dec:
"NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Eastman Kodak Co. (EK) and Shutterfly Inc. (SFLY) have filed suit against each other, claiming patent infringement as competition heats up in the online photography market.

Shutterfly, an Internet-based photo publishing service, said in a securities filing Wednesday that it received notice Friday that Kodak had filed suit against the company, alleging it infringes Kodak's patents by making and selling image products through its website, Shutterfly.com.

Kodak, which sells similar photo prints, albums and picture-stamped mugs via its Kodak Gallery site, is seeking an injunction and damages, Shutterfly said in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Shutterfly said it intends to defend itself vigorously.

Shutterfly then sued Kodak Monday over its Kodak Gallery Software, according to the filing. It's also seeking an injunction and damages.

"Consistent with our intellectual property strategy, we are committed to taking appropriate action to enforce our patents against unauthorized use," Kodak spokesman David Lanzillo said in an emailed statement.

Kodak for years has been trying to rebrand itself as a digital imaging powerhouse as revenue slides in its traditional film business. Kodak, which helped popularize consumer photography but has struggled amid the rise of new digital technology, has reported only one full-year profit--in 2007--since 2004. The company has relied in large part on patent settlements for revenue in recent years as it waits for new business lines, such as inkjet printers, to gain traction. Kodak has suits pending against Apple Inc. (AAPL) and Research in Motion Ltd. (RIMM), and last winter scored significant royalty deals with Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (SSNHY, 005930.SE) and LG Electronics Inc. (066570.SE) for its digital-camera technology.

In another sign of its woes, Kodak--a component of the Dow Jones Industrial Average until 2004--will be removed from the Standard & Poor's 500 index at the end of trading Friday, in part due to its declining market capitalization. The company's market value is about $1.4 billion.

Kodak shares were up about 5 cents at $5.28 in recent trading and have risen 25% this year, while Shutterfly climbed 2.4% to $34.36 and has almost doubled in 2010. "
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101215-710289.html

Tons more if you google Shutterfly Kodak.

 It seems like they are talking about a system that kodak started long ago, where you would send in a roll of film and get back a cd with scans on it, and a little "contact sheet" with thumbnails that linked to the full size images at various resolutions. I can honestly say that kodak was the first place i saw that used the 'thumbnail to full image link" system, but i guess time and the courts will tell. Kodaks stock has been rising lately, so maybe they do have a case. Buy on the rumour, sell on the news

as economy crumbles, I think we will see more and more companies viciously using non productive means trying to get their hands on the remaining  few extra dollars going around, as compensation. Capitalism is going to be showing it's worst face - expect that in microstock too (just look at istock)

Quite a leap of reasoning equating Kodak's exertion of their perceived legal rights to a condemnation of Capitalism. And how exactly is istock lumped in with the alleged sins of Kodak?

Quote from: molka on December 23, 2010, 09:44

as economy crumbles, I think we will see more and more companies viciously using non productive means trying to get their hands on the remaining  few extra dollars going around, as compensation. Capitalism is going to be showing it's worst face - expect that in microstock too (just look at istock)

Quite a leap of reasoning equating Kodak's exertion of their perceived legal rights to a condemnation of Capitalism. And how exactly is istock lumped in with the alleged sins of Kodak?

1. Where is the leap? It's a direct connection.

2. I didn't condemn capitalism, I basically said it's getting perverted. Not a big surprise in a crisis.

... So apparently they feel they have a patent on the entire concept of printing and selling merchandise with images on them. Interesting to see how this one shakes out.  

Uh huh... I don't think Michelin, Bridgestone etc. are paying royalties to the heirs of the guy who invented the wheel or do they?

Quote from: lisafx on December 22, 2010, 19:13

... So apparently they feel they have a patent on the entire concept of printing and selling merchandise with images on them. Interesting to see how this one shakes out.  

Uh huh... I don't think Michelin, Bridgestone etc. are paying royalties to the heirs of the guy who invented the wheel or do they?

I believe that in order to use a patent...doesn't it have to be bought by the user or have permission of the owner? I'm not sure how they work, but I doubt you'd pay royalties to the owner of a patent. Gotta go Google it.....lol

Edit: Google....  there is a possibility of royalties having to be paid...lol
http://ezinearticles.com/?Using-Someone-Elses-Patent-to-Bring-A-Product-to-Market&id=128123
"Often inventors and innovators will come up with a way to make a better mousetrap. Often they will find others hold patents to a critical component to make this better mousetrap innovation or invention. Therefore they need to make a deal with the company or individual holding the patent so that they can use this technology to make their invention and sell it. One way to do this is to offer to pay them a per unit royalty on each unit made or sold. And most savvy companies who agree to this will want audit rights to check the books on how many items were built and/or sold by the better mousetrap maker. "