Judge approves Kodak digital-imaging patent sale to Apple, Google and others
The bankruptcy court judge overseeing Kodak's sell-off of its digital-imaging patents has given the green light to sell the IP to a group of company's that includes Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech heavyweights.
Judge Allan L. Gropper on Friday approved the terms of sale for a collection of 1,100 patents relating to the capture and display of digital images, bringing Kodak's bankruptcy proceedings one step closer to resolution, reports The Wall Street Journal.
It was reported in December that an Apple-led consortium put in a winning bid of $525 million for rights to the patent licenses, but Friday's court hearing revealed the actual sale price to be slightly higher at $527 million. Initial hopes were to garner at least $2 billion from the patent auction.
Judge Gropper called the final price "disappointing," but noted the much-needed cash will help Kodak move forward with restructuring plans that will see the company emerge from bankruptcy with a new look targeting commercial customers.
"The amount in the transactions, which are complicated and integrated, are the highest and best value available to the debtors," said Kodak lawyer Michael H. Torkin.
The struggling photography pioneer's $830 million loan package required the company net at least $500 million from the sale.
Included in the group of winning bidders are Apple, Google, Microsoft, Adobe, RIM, Samsung, Fujifilm, Facebook, Huawei Technologies, Shutterfly and units of HTC and Amazon. When bidding first started in July of last year, Apple and Google led two separate teams, but less-than-adequate offers prompted the consortia to rearrange alliances.
In its decline, Kodak has been forced to sell many of its core businesses, like the camera sector it pioneered in 1900 with the Brownie box camera and attached film development service.
Judge Allan L. Gropper on Friday approved the terms of sale for a collection of 1,100 patents relating to the capture and display of digital images, bringing Kodak's bankruptcy proceedings one step closer to resolution, reports The Wall Street Journal.
It was reported in December that an Apple-led consortium put in a winning bid of $525 million for rights to the patent licenses, but Friday's court hearing revealed the actual sale price to be slightly higher at $527 million. Initial hopes were to garner at least $2 billion from the patent auction.
Judge Gropper called the final price "disappointing," but noted the much-needed cash will help Kodak move forward with restructuring plans that will see the company emerge from bankruptcy with a new look targeting commercial customers.
"The amount in the transactions, which are complicated and integrated, are the highest and best value available to the debtors," said Kodak lawyer Michael H. Torkin.
The struggling photography pioneer's $830 million loan package required the company net at least $500 million from the sale.
Included in the group of winning bidders are Apple, Google, Microsoft, Adobe, RIM, Samsung, Fujifilm, Facebook, Huawei Technologies, Shutterfly and units of HTC and Amazon. When bidding first started in July of last year, Apple and Google led two separate teams, but less-than-adequate offers prompted the consortia to rearrange alliances.
In its decline, Kodak has been forced to sell many of its core businesses, like the camera sector it pioneered in 1900 with the Brownie box camera and attached film development service.
Comments
Kodak a great company in it's day. Sold out by old crony's who thought themselves superior. And it's printers they advertised as cheap and easy to use became a joke.
Maybe Kodak should have partnered with Apple instead of Apple buying Kodaks patents.
My first digital camera was the Kodak DC-40 that I bought in 1996. They were way ahead of the game. I am surprised they didn't use their strong photography brand and early digital lead to become a digital camera powerhouse.
They did. With Apple, back in 1994, to produce the QuickTake. Wiki
I used to have one of those. For its time, it was a fantastic product.
Originally Posted by Evilution
Hopefully it'll lead to a new apple camera.
You mean better camera hardware in all shipping Apple devices that use them, right?
I love my Nikons and Canons but some help with their UIs from Apple would be welcome. Imagine a Siri enabled DSLR ... "Camera, set to: AV, ISO 100, three stops, bracketing, 2 second delay..." Drool.
Apple level interface in a shipping Camera also
Mega-Groan
Truly beautifully written with your use of adjectives. Hats off to you sir.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Judge Gropper called the final price "disappointing,"...
Hmm... methink the Judge should keep his personal opinions to himself. Since when did he get the expertise to judge the value of patents? If he thought it too low, maybe he could have made a higher bid himself.
Indeed sflocal.
"Mr. Gropper, the next time we want your opinion we'll give it to you."
This judge has overstepped his bounds on several occasions. For example, he allowed the sale of patents to go through, even though the ownership of the patents was in question at the time. He is far too eager to be seen as the person who saved HP and not eager enough to ensure that the law and justice are served.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
Hmm... methink the Judge should keep his personal opinions to himself.
Sounds like saying that the California jury foreman should've kept his personal opinions to himself . Both can speak their mind after the case is over.
Quote:
Since when did he get the expertise to judge the value of patents?
One of a bankruptcy court's purposes is to get as much as possible from assets, in order to help everyone.
In this case, the judge didn't set the expectations. The expected value of the patents given by experts, had been closer to $2 billion.
That amount would've helped pay off more debts and allowed keeping more employees. So naturally the outcome was disappointing from that standpoint. By using a consortium to buy the patents, the bidding was kept artificially low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You mean better camera hardware in all shipping Apple devices that use them, right?
No, I mean a dedicated camera to take on the Samsung Galaxy camera.
Mr Jobs said himself that he wanted to better the experience of music, computing, textbooks and photography so it'd only be following the great man's wishes.
The Galaxy camera does look nice but I just couldn't bring myself to buy something with Samsung written on it.
Originally Posted by Evilution
No, I mean a dedicated camera to take on the Samsung Galaxy camera.
They're not gonna do that. First because that thing is a piece of crap and second because people don't want to carry around more than one thing.
Mr Jobs said himself that he wanted to better the experience of music, computing, textbooks and photography so it'd only be following the great man's wishes.
So they'll improve the cameras on existing iDevices.
Crap indeed. Just read a couple reviews and it's a truly horrible device. I cannot believe the stupidity of the developers and designers at Samsung. I thought MS had a monopoly on designing crap.
I wonder if it is feasible to put a mirror under a 45 degree angle behind the camera opening and make use of the full height of an iPhone for the lens glass. Because more glass the better, simply put.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So they'll improve the cameras on existing iDevices.
All of which will not have optical zoom, a truly good lens system or room for a decent CCD sensor.
So all you will have is an all in 1 device that can do some things well and some things only averagely.
If your wedding photographer turned up and pulled out an iPhone you wouldn't consider him a professional would you?
The iDevices do a good job considering their footprint but this fad of making things thinner and thinner will affect things like photo clarity as they have less room for lenses. There are big differences in picture quality over different 8MP sensors. Whilst the iPhone etc are good point and click cameras for nights out and photos of your kids in halloween costumes, it's not a great camera for people who enjoy photography.
However, I am well aware of whom I am disagreeing with so I'll not expect you to change from your mind from your initial hastily thought out response.
Originally Posted by Evilution
All of which will not have optical zoom, a truly good lens system or room for a decent CCD sensor.
Really? You're sure about all these things? Because tech changes. Tech changes quickly.
Whilst the iPhone etc are good point and click cameras for nights out and photos of your kids in halloween costumes…
I would think the iPhone's sensor would be poor in low-light situations, but above average everywhere else. Is that not the case?
…it's not a great camera for people who enjoy photography.
That's a bit of a stretch to say, considering it's not something that can be said.
However, I am well aware of whom I am disagreeing with so I'll not expect you to change from your mind from your initial hastily thought out response.
Grow up? That's about it.