Discussions

News: Sun and Kodak settle for $92 million

Bookmark and Share Get thread feed

  1. Sun and Kodak settle for $92 million (27 messages)

    • Posted by: Dion Almaer
    • Posted on: October 07 2004 20:18 EDT
    Kodak accepted a $92 million offer by Sun to settle a $1 billion patent-infringement lawsuit over the Java programming language. This settlement occurred a day before the damages phase.
    Without admitting or denying the allegations, Sun Microsystems said it will pay Kodak $92 million to settle all claims in the dispute. In exchange, Sun said it receives a license for Java under all Kodak patents.

    "The settlement assures customers worldwide that Sun will stand behind its products and intellectual property, and eliminates any uncertainty that could result from a protracted lawsuit and appeal," the Santa Clara, Calif.-based company said.

    "We are eager to put this punitive litigation behind us," added its president, Jonathan Schwartz.

    Describing the settlement as tentative, Kodak's senior vice president, Willy Shih, said the photography company was "pleased that the court has validated these fundamental Kodak patents."

    Kodak had been prepared to request $1.06 billion in lump-sum royalties — equal to half Sun Microsystems' operating profit from sales of computer servers and storage equipment from January 1998 to June 2001.
    Sun Press Release

    Read: Kodak, Sun Microsystems Settle Java Suit

    Sun settles Java spat with Kodak for $92m
    Reply to this

    Threaded Messages (27)

  2. If i were sun,I will pay no money[ Go to top ]

    I will choose to appeal to a higher court.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  3. Sun is so smart[ Go to top ]

    It's a good choice
    Reply to this Reply to original

  4. Effect on open source Java ?[ Go to top ]

    I suppose the license granted to Sun by Kodak does not extend to any open source implementation of Java. Which means that any open source implementation of Java runs the risk of infringing on Kodak's patents and receiving cease and desist love letters from their lawyers. In a related issue,I wonder if Microsoft's .NET CLR contains identical infringing technologies given the similiarity with Java ?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  5. Effect on open source Java ?[ Go to top ]

    Sun could indemnify open source java, if Java were open sourced, potentially through the TCKs. But that is a bigger question.

    I don't think that this is a bad move by Sun. The potential cost (both in time and money) and need to focus on a patent infirngement case when it has better things to do, was probably seen to be the worse of two evils.

    Also, if Kodak got money from Java, it may well go for .Net. The point is that Kodak needed money, not the case, and Sun didn't need the infringement case hanging around all the time. Sun pays a bit of money, doesn't accept that infringed, Kodak accepts the money say "well okay, you can use them", and eeryone goes back to their day jobs.

    I wouldn't be surprised, if something else between Kodak and Java came out of this.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  6. Quick, someone tell SCO[ Go to top ]

    I suppose the license granted to Sun by Kodak does not extend to any open source implementation of Java. Which means that any open source implementation of Java runs the risk of infringing on Kodak's patents and receiving cease and desist love letters from their lawyers. In a related issue,I wonder if Microsoft's .NET CLR contains identical infringing technologies given the similiarity with Java ?
    Given that noone knows what the agreement between Sun and Kodak really says, it's hard to make an educated guess. It would be unlikely for any company to pay the large sum of money to cover other people's bases, too, though. That would put other Java vendors at an interesting position, Kodak could go after Apple next, and then proceed along the Java licensee chain to milk it.

    Otoh, there is not much of a business case behind suing small volunteer projects, like Kaffe, IKVM, SableVM, or gcj, as they don't have 100$M in cash, let alone 1$B. Kodak would spend far more on lawyers than get out of it.

    IBM, Microsoft & HP have all licensed the patents from Wang/Kodak, afaik, so that leaves the other profitable Java vendors, like Apple, BEA, etc. as targets for legal action.

    It also puts out the message that Sun is more likely to settle potentially frivolous lawsuits, than to fight them. That might encourage Microsoft shills like SCO to have a go at the Sun ligitation lottery, to get some of the 2$B back. The hunting season is now open. Sigh.

    cheers,
    dalibor topic
    Reply to this Reply to original

  7. Licensees indemnified...[ Go to top ]

    IBM, Microsoft & HP have all licensed the patents from Wang/Kodak, afaik, so that leaves the other profitable Java vendors, like Apple, BEA, etc. as targets for legal action.
    If I'm not mistaken, Java licensees should be covered under licensee indemnification provided by Sun. This is one of the key points made by Sun as a counter to the call to open source Java.

    -chris
    Reply to this Reply to original

  8. ... if Sun feels like it.[ Go to top ]

    IBM, Microsoft & HP have all licensed the patents from Wang/Kodak, afaik, so that leaves the other profitable Java vendors, like Apple, BEA, etc. as targets for legal action.
    If I'm not mistaken, Java licensees should be covered under licensee indemnification provided by Sun. This is one of the key points made by Sun as a counter to the call to open source Java.
    I don't recall that argument being put forward by Sun. I recall a lot of talk about jewelry, forks, compatibility, evil Microsoft and all that, but I don't recall Sun claiming that they would indemnify everyone from third party claims. Got a link somewhere? As far as I recall the SCSL, requires that you indemnify Sun, but not necessarily the other way round.

    5c) "Right of Intervention. Original Contributor will have
    the right, but not the obligation, to defend You, at
    Original Contributor's expense, in connection with a claim
    that Your Commercial Use of Original Code and Upgraded Code
    is an infringement of a third party patent and will, if
    Original Contributor chooses to defend You, pay all damages
    costs and fees awarded by a court of competent jurisdiction,
    or such settlement amount negotiated by Original
    Contributor, attributable to such claim."

    from http://wwws.sun.com/software/communitysource/j2se/java2/license.html

    As far as I can understand the legalese, that means that Sun can, but doesn't have to defend Apple if Kodak sues them, or any other Java vendor.

    cheers,
    dalibor topic
    Reply to this Reply to original

  9. Bye, bye to "free" j2ee software.[ Go to top ]

    " Because of the nature of the patents in the Kodak vs. Sun case, Eunice said, it is possible that Kodak may try to reach into the deep pockets of companies like Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL - news) or BEA Systems (Nasdaq: BEAS - news) that rely on Java and use the object-management technology without a cross license."
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20041008/bs_nf/27459


    Open source will also likely be shutdown.
    Nothing Sun and the socialists can do but pay up.
    This has always been a big risk for companies using free software and trying to get something for nothing....what's that saying about a free lunch?



    Matt
    Reply to this Reply to original

  10. This is getting funny...[ Go to top ]

    Been a few days now and still no mention of the new version of websphere:

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1667860,00.asp

    This is 'enterprise java' news, is it not? Why are they ignoring this story? Trying to keep it hush hush?

    Now I see why TSS did their comparison between .NET and Websphere...the version they used was just at the end of it's cycle...they did not bother waiting a couple weeks to test against the new version even though they probably knew that it was due out real soon.

    Ahh, just another day at the M$ sponsored TSS.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  11. WAS 6 Not released yet[ Go to top ]

    From the Press Release:
    Availability for both WebSphere Application Server Version 6 and WebSphere Application Sever Express Version 6 is expected before the end of the year.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  12. WAS 6 Not released yet[ Go to top ]

    Ahhh...I did not see that. I eat my words. Although I would imagine that if this kind of story was available for a microsoft product they would have put it on TSS.net...still no mention here.

    Does TSS only talk about 'released' stuff and nothing else?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  13. WAS 6 Not released yet[ Go to top ]

    IBM has been talking about WAS 6.0 for a couple of years now even putting the alpha version up on their website a LONG time ago to give the impression it's release was soon.

    Why? Because compared to Weblogic 7.x and 8.1, WAS 5.x looks OLD. IBM's not a far behind as they use to be but I mean IBM only *recently* released a J2EE server that ran on JDK 1.4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And unlike Weblogic you can't debug Websphere w/o a 10x slowdown due to IBM's JDK not being able to have it's JIT on in debug mode (unlike Sun's HotSpot).

    No wonder IBM wants Java Open Source, they are incapable or writing their own JVM in a timely manner.

    As for TSS being PRO-M$, if anything they are PRO Weblogic they are built on Weblogic 7.x.

    FYI...I've been using Websphere for the past 1.5 years after coming from Weblogic and I really look forward to WAS 6.0 AND a real JDK for IBM. Until then I shake my head at why anyone would choose Weblogic over Websphere on TECHNICAL merits.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  14. WAS 6 Not released yet[ Go to top ]

    Ooops, meant to say "why anyone would choose WebSphere over Weblogic based on TECHNICAL merits".
    Reply to this Reply to original

  15. This is getting funny...[ Go to top ]

    Ahh, just another day at the M$ sponsored TSS.
    Huh? Todays left-side ad is from... IBM.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  16. Get rid of software patents[ Go to top ]

    I don't know all the details of this case, but I think it shows one of the problems with software patents. Nobody seems bothered to fight them, they just settle. How does the patent in this particular case not apply to all object-oriented langauges and only Java (if that is the case)? Why did they only go after Sun? Seems very dodgy.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  17. Take a stand[ Go to top ]

    In this case, it is probably a wise and pragmatic decision from SUN to not fight the (broken) system and be able to continue with its business. The downside is that this sends the wrong signal to all vulture companies out there that hold ridiculous patents, that there is money to be made...

    In the future, to avoid desperate companies taking advantage of broken patent processes, I wish the U.S. would deal with this serious issue top-down, since single companies don't have the time or energy to fight this alone, and (since my first wish has a high probability of being futile) for all citizens of the European Union to learn from the U.S. mistakes and take a stand by signing the following petition.

    http://petition.eurolinux.org/index_html

    May reason prevail.

    /Par
    Reply to this Reply to original

  18. Take a stand[ Go to top ]

    I'm sceptical about the softare patents in EU. As far as I know this petition has been useless and EU is heading the american way. A lot of lawyers in EU parlament smell the money coming from the upcoming software patents lawsuites. You see, what an amazing businnes is waiting for them.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  19. Java programming iillegal[ Go to top ]

    ... it's time to switch back to c/c++ and compiled languages.

    I too i'm skeptical about EU being free in its opinion.

    Lawyers are lobbying pro, and this will put us living
    in Europe in jeopardy...

    I'm strongly pro-EU, please E. don't make me regret it.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  20. Java programming iillegal[ Go to top ]

    "... it's time to switch back to c/c++ and compiled languages"

    Like gcj?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  21. Java programming iillegal[ Go to top ]

    ... it's time to switch back to c/c++ and compiled languages.
    No need to go back to the dark ages. Squeak (modern Smalltalk-80) is free, so is SML/NJ. OK, the latter is a bit of a reach but I'm serious about the former.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  22. Take a stand[ Go to top ]

    Well, count me in on being sceptical and cynical regarding people's destructive and short-term greed abilities, but never count me in on those standing on the sidelines waiting for the fit to hit the shan... :-|

    /P
    Reply to this Reply to original

  23. Take a stand[ Go to top ]

    I'm sceptical about the softare patents in EU. As far as I know this petition has been useless and EU is heading the american way. A lot of lawyers in EU parlament smell the money coming from the upcoming software patents lawsuites. You see, what an amazing businnes is waiting for them.
    Sounds like a little distorted vision, maybe from the other side of the ocean.
    Actually, the fight against swpats in Europe is not over yet, but it has been very successful to thwart manipulation from pro-patents lobbies. For example the Netherland withdraw their support to the directive project.

    So actually what Europe needs now, for its own good but also for the good of the whole software industry, including that of the US, is that American companies make themselves heard against swpats. So did Red Hat, and IBM also questioned the US patent system. I recently found a position from Oracle, against swpats: http://www.base.com/software-patents/statements/oracle.html ...

    As for the ObjectWeb consortium, who was born in Europe but now counts coporate members in the US (Librados, Red Hat), in Asia (Nec Soft, ...), some members worked on a community whitepaper (see: http://wiki.objectweb.org/Wiki.jsp?page=CWP_SoftwarePatents) to state a position wrt swpats.

    So you're right, as <undisclosed name> say: the only winners if software patents are made legal in Europe would be the lawyers. But it's not done yet.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  24. This is not the last[ Go to top ]

    Apparently Xerox has the patent on specifying security access rights in an XML file.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  25. This is not the last[ Go to top ]

    Apparently Xerox has the patent on specifying security access rights in an XML file.
    Perhaps this is why java.policy is a proprietary format?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  26. This is not the last[ Go to top ]

    Apparently Xerox has the patent on specifying security access rights in an XML file.
    Perhaps this is why java.policy is a proprietary format?
    No, it's because Java is older than XML.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  27. Sun and Kodak settle for $92 million[ Go to top ]

    Good, let SCO, KODAK or whatever losers keep suing on profitable companies based on their non-sense patents that they managed to get when there were no guidelines. Making the innovation be a solely biggest victim of all and talented technical brains wasted on lawyers' greeds. Surely will corporate greed pay its toll out of their own blood. Those losers should blame themselves of lack of business mind of new era. There is no free lunch. Its future is only going downward.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  28. people just didn't get it[ Go to top ]

    Kodak is no more evil than Sun or MS. They all benefit from the flawed system. That's why Sun would rather pay the fine than fighting the system. They all see the flaws of the system, but are comfortably enjoying it.
    Reply to this Reply to original