ShareThis Page
Kodak anticipates ruling on patent infringements |

Kodak anticipates ruling on patent infringements

The Associated Press
| Thursday, June 30, 2011 12:00 a.m

ROCHESTER, N.Y. — Innovation turned Eastman Kodak Co. into one of the world’s most recognizable brands. Imitation by its rivals might help keep the picture-taking pioneer from fading into history.

The 131-year-old company, which popularized photography beginning with the Brownie box camera in 1900, is looking for a lucrative patent infringement triumph this week over iPhone behemoth Apple Inc. and BlackBerry maker Research in Motion Ltd.

A hoped-for Kodak moment before a trade dispute arbiter would ease at least temporarily the intensifying pressure on the maker of cameras, film and printers. Kodak, slow to phase out its 20th-century cash cow of celluloid film, is trying to redefine itself as a 21st-century powerhouse in digital imaging.

Mining its rich array of inventions has become indispensable in Kodak’s push to reverse four years of losses and return to profitability in 2012. Kodak has a promising array of new inkjet printing, packaging and software businesses, but it needs to tap other sources of revenue before investments in those areas have time to pay off.

Kodak’s patents give the company exclusive rights to sell or license its inventions. Since 2008, Kodak has generated almost $2 billion in licensing fees and royalties from intellectual-property battles, both in negotiations and through the courts. The company’s dispute with Apple and RIM centers on technology Kodak patented in 2001 for extracting a still image while previewing it in the camera’s LCD screen.

Chief Executive Antonio Perez estimates that Kodak could get up to $1 billion from the two companies over the life of the patent if Kodak gets a favorable ruling today before the U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington.

Because the federal agency can block imports of patent-infringing products, a Kodak victory could force Apple of Cupertino, Calif., and RIM of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, to spend hundreds of millions of dollars apiece in licensing fees to bring in smartphones made overseas. Apple and RIM declined to comment on the case.

Kodak’s transition to a new world of photography was hindered by a reluctance to phase out celluloid film. The world’s biggest film manufacturer finally started a four-year digital makeover in 2004, spending $3.4 billion to close aged factories, chop and change businesses and eliminate 37,000 of its 64,000 jobs.

It closed 2007 on a high note with net income of $676 million, then ran smack into the recession.

To bridge the economic chasm, Kodak cut back operations even more drastically, squeezing cash from a fast-shrinking film business, a portfolio of more than 1,000 digital-imaging patents and the sale of non-strategic units, including microfilm and image sensors.

Kodak’s stock has lost more than 85 percent of its value since the onset of the recession and now hovers below $3.50 a share.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.