Elderly professor vs Sony in Blu-ray row
p2pnet news | Security:- Columbia University professor emeritus Gertrude Neumark Rothschild is going after Sony and a whole slew of other high tech firms.
She wants to block imports into the US of Blu-ray products she says infringe a patent she owns.
Now the US International Trade Commission (ITC) has launched an investigation of, “certain short-wavelength light emitting diodes, laser diodes, and products containing same”.
The 34 companies named by Rothschild include Sony, together with Motorola and Nokia.
“The products at issue in this investigation are short-wavelength (e.g., blue, violet) LEDs and laser diodes that are used in products such as hand-held mobile devices, instrument panels, billboards, traffic lights, HD DVD players (e.g., Blu-ray disc players), and data storage devices,” says the ITC, going on Rothschild wants the ITC issue exclusion orders and cease and desist orders.
Named are:
Avago Technologies of Singapore; Bacol Optoelectonic Co. Ltd. of Taiwan; Dominant Semiconductors Sdn. Bhd. of Malaysia; Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd., of Taiwan; Exceed Perseverance Electronic Ind. Co., Ltd., of China; Guangzhou Hongli Opto-Electronic Co., Ltd., of China; Harvatek Internaional Inc. of Taiwan; Hitachi, Ltd., of Japan; Kingbright Electronic Co., Ltd., of Taiwan; LG Electronics of Korea; Lite-On Technology Corp. of Taiwan; Lucky Light Electronics Co., Ltd., of China; Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., of Japan; Motorola, Inc., of Schaumburg, IL; Nokia of Finland; Opto Tech Corporation of Taiwan; Pioneer Corporation of Japan; Rohm Co., Ltd., of Japan; Samsung Group of Korea; Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., of Japan; Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., of Korea; Sharp Corporation of Japan; Shenzhen Unilight Electronic Co., Ltd., of China; Shinano Kenshi Co., Ltd., of Japan; Sony Corporation of Japan; Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB of Sweden; Stanley Electric Co., Ltd., of Japan; Toshiba Corporation of Japan; Vishay Intertechnology, Inc., of Malvern, PA; and, Yellow Stone Corporation of Taiwan.
Paul J. Luckern, an ITC administrative law judge, will hold an evidentiary hearing to make an initial determination as to whether or not a violation of section 337 has occurred.
“The ITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time,” it says, adding:
“Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the ITC will set a target date for completing the investigation.”
Also See:
The Pirate Bay – ITC institutes section 337 investigation on certain shortwavelength light emitting diodes, laser diodes and products containing the same, March 20, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe
to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.phpNet access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
March 25th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
I’d like to see this patent, are patents readily viewable online? If so, it should be linked with this story so we can make our own assessment. This would be pretty big news if she can prove her case.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I smell troll!
March 25th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
lol
I think Sony and several others in the list are going pissing their pants right now.
If they are infringing the patent and if she doesn’t want the buy out basically they are screwed and will have to reinvent blueray.
Maybe this is why the XBox doesn’t have an internal HD-DVD player.
Microsoft (for once) didn’t want to get sued
March 25th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I believe the Also see: link to The Pirate bBy points to the wrong URL. It currently points to Time.com about leaked pages in the last Harry Potter book?
March 26th, 2008 at 6:06 am
if she has patent rights to the blue laser diode then all of these named electronics companies- and probably some not named- will have to pony up for using the technology. if i was a patent owner i would make sure the patent laws are enforced or else no one would bother to invent anything. i’m sure the big companies would rather run roughshod over every patent holder but that is the purpose of the patents.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Why stop at importation into the US? Why not stop them from production of anything using the technology?
IF she does in fact own the patent to this technology why allow it to continue ANYWHERE? If she does in fact own the patent then I hope she wins BIG!