kodak wordmarkIn line with a report from earlier this month, Eastman Kodak today announced that it has reached a deal to sell its portfolio of digital imaging patents to a consortium of 12 companies organized by patent holding firms Intellectual Ventures and RPX Corporation for $525 million.

Under the agreements, Kodak will receive approximately $525 million, a portion of which will be paid by 12 intellectual property licensees organized by Intellectual Ventures and RPX Corporation, with each licensee receiving rights with respect to the digital imaging patent portfolio and certain other Kodak patents. Another portion will be paid by Intellectual Ventures, which is acquiring the digital imaging patent portfolio subject to these new licenses, as well as previously existing licenses.

TechCrunch cites a court filing naming the 12 members of the consortium, which includes both Apple and Google as had been previously reported.

Apple, Inc.
Research In Motion Limited
Google Inc.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Adobe Systems Incorporated
HTC Corporation
Facebook, Inc.
Fujifilm Corporation
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc.
Shutterfly, Inc.
Microsoft Corporation

The consortium approach among rivals allows the companies to prevent a bidding war and helps ensure that each of them holds licenses to the patents at defined cost, eliminating the risk of later licensing negotiations or protracted court battles.

Top Rated Comments

gnasher729 Avatar
158 months ago
Could someone explain how this is legal and yet price fixing is not?
Nobody stopped you from going to your bank, asking for a big loan, and offering $1million more. Or to start another consortium that bid higher. Price fixing is something that a seller or several sellers do. Apple, Google, Samsung and whoever else is in this are the customers. They are the buyers. Anti-price fixing laws are there to protect the buyers, not the sellers. If you go to an Apple Store and offer $500 for a MBP, maybe they will laugh at you, but you won't get arrested. And if you bring a dozen friends and you all offer $500 for a MBP, they may laugh even louder, but you still won't get arrested.

And what makes you think these patents were worth more than was paid for them? Patents are worth money insofar as you can use them to create better products. They may be worth money if you want to use them to blackmail others, but that practice is generally frowned upon (everybody frowns upon it if someone other than their favourite company does it, and many dislike it even if their favourite company does it). Apple is in the "selling expensive hardware" business. Why would they pay out money to get into the "patent troll" business? So here are twelve companies who apparently want to use these patents to build products, and they offered what the patents were worth. If they were worth more, then surely someone would have offered more.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
0815 Avatar
158 months ago
That is good news - that way not one big player gets the patents and can screw the other ones. Just hope the new Consortium doesn't become a patent troll to use it against others.

And while the big companies are at it with the patent consortium ... why does not every company throw their own patents in their and everyone in there can use the other patents so that the legal bs finally stops and they can concentrate on innovation again (and free MacRumors from Patent war headlines)
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ftaok Avatar
158 months ago
I'm guessing whats left of Kodak would have preferred a bidding war?
i agree. While I'm happy with this development ... If only because I don't have to hear about these patents anymore. But the capitalist in me feels like there could be some anticompetitive behavior here. So these 12 big corporations can rake the little guys over these patents?
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
IJ Reilly Avatar
158 months ago
Could someone explain how this is legal and yet price fixing is not?

Price fixing per se is not illegal. Every company "fixes" prices for their own products, and many of them also control the prices retailers can advertise. Collusion to fix prices is the potentially illegal act. This involves competitors getting together to control market prices for products. The result is a cartel, the best example being OPEC.

Have these companies formed a cartel? Probably not, but time will tell by what they do with this patent trove, and not by the fact that they control it.
Score: 1 Votes (Like | Disagree)
charlieegan3 Avatar
158 months ago
Nobody stopped you from going to your bank, asking for a big loan, and offering $1million more. Or to start another consortium that bid higher. Price fixing is something that a seller or several sellers do. Apple, Google, Samsung and whoever else is in this are the customers. They are the buyers. Anti-price fixing laws are there to protect the buyers, not the sellers. If you go to an Apple Store and offer $500 for a MBP, maybe they will laugh at you, but you won't get arrested. And if you bring a dozen friends and you all offer $500 for a MBP, they may laugh even louder, but you still won't get arrested.

And what makes you think these patents were worth more than was paid for them? Patents are worth money insofar as you can use them to create better products. They may be worth money if you want to use them to blackmail others, but that practice is generally frowned upon (everybody frowns upon it if someone other than their favourite company does it, and many dislike it even if their favourite company does it). Apple is in the "selling expensive hardware" business. Why would they pay out money to get into the "patent troll" business? So here are twelve companies who apparently want to use these patents to build products, and they offered what the patents were worth. If they were worth more, then surely someone would have offered more.

Okay thanks, good explanation. +1
Score: 1 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Thunderhawks Avatar
158 months ago
I'm guessing whats left of Kodak would have preferred a bidding war?

Actually a smart way to keep costs down and not so good for a patent holder.
And, if the patent holder doesn't agree, they can outwait the company until the are running out of cash.

Shame that Kodak wasn't able to look into the future and adjust it's business accordingly.

Their museum is worth a visit.
Score: 1 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Popular Stories

iPhone 17 Pro Dual Tone Feature 1

iPhone 17 Pro Launching Later This Year With These 8 New Features

Thursday January 9, 2025 5:45 am PST by
While the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max are not expected to launch until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices. iPhone 17 Pro concept based on rumors Below, we recap key changes rumored for the iPhone 17 Pro models as of January 2025: More aluminum: iPhone 17 Pro models are rumored to have an aluminum frame, whereas the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro models ...
HomePod mini and Apple TV

HomePod Mini 2 and New Apple TV Launch Timeframe Narrowed Down

Sunday January 12, 2025 4:11 pm PST by
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman recently reported that Apple plans to release new HomePod mini and Apple TV models this year, and now he has provided a more precise timeframe. In his Power On newsletter today, Gurman said Apple is currently aiming to launch the new HomePod mini and Apple TV models "toward the end of the year." That timeframe suggests the devices will be released at some point...
AppleEventLogoFeature

Apple Focusing on These Eight New Low-Cost Devices in 2025

Saturday January 11, 2025 1:00 am PST by
Apple's slate of 2025 products look to be dominated by a large number of low-cost and entry-level devices. Here's what to expect. With advancements like Apple Intelligence and all-new in-house chip designs, Apple is reportedly looking to enhance many of its budget-friendly offerings, ensuring they remain competitive in an increasingly crowded market. These updates also indicate a slight...
iPhone 17 Pro Dual Tone Horizontal 1

iPhone 17 Pro Main Camera Sensor 'Smaller' Than iPhone 16 Pro Sensor

Friday January 10, 2025 3:14 am PST by
This year's iPhone 17 Pro models will feature a smaller main camera sensor than the one used in the Fusion camera currently found in iPhone 16 Pro models, according to Weibo-based leaker Digital Chat Station. The Chinese leaker claims that Apple will adopt a 1/1.3" sensor for the 48MP main camera in the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, down from the 1/1.28" sensor used in the iPhone 16...
se 4 for 2025

When to Expect the iPhone SE 4 or So-Called 'iPhone 16E' to Launch

Friday January 10, 2025 9:20 am PST by
Apple is widely rumored to be planning a new iPhone SE, and multiple sources lately have commented on the device's launch timing. The latest word comes from Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. In a blog post today, he said the device will be released around the middle of the first half of 2025. In other words, around the quarter mark of 2025. That means the next iPhone SE will likely be ...
airpods pro 2 botw

Hearing a Mysterious Chime From Your AirPods Pro Case? It's a Feature

Thursday January 9, 2025 3:42 pm PST by
If you've been hearing a chiming sound from your AirPods Pro 2 case when the AirPods are charging, it's a feature that Apple added with the launch of Hearing Health last year. In a support guide, Apple says that the AirPods Pro may play a sound every so often while in the case to ensure the microphones and speakers are working as intended. From Apple: To help ensure that your AirPods...
Generic iOS 18

iOS 18.3 Coming Soon: Here's What's New

Monday January 13, 2025 5:33 am PST by
iOS 18.3 is currently in beta for developers and public beta testers. So far, the upcoming iPhone software update is very minor in scope. Below, we outline what is new in iOS 18.3 so far. The only potential new feature coming to iPhones with iOS 18.3 so far is robot vacuum support in the Home app, but this functionality is not yet live. Apple is laying the groundwork for the feature,...
apple pay feature dynamic island

Apple Pay Now Lets You Pay Later With Synchrony [Updated]

Friday January 10, 2025 11:34 am PST by
Synchrony is now available as a buy-now, pay-later option when checking out with Apple Pay online and in apps on iPhone and iPad. Synchrony was added to a list of Apple Pay installment providers in the U.S. in an Apple support document that was updated today, joining Affirm and Klarna. The addition was spotted by MacRumors contributor Aaron Perris. iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 users can select...