Previous news story    Next news story

Nikon sues Sakar for infringement with Polaroid iM1836 Android camera

By dpreview staff on Oct 15, 2013 at 07:15 GMT

Nikon Inc. has announced it's suing Sakar International Inc. over the design of the Polaroid iM1836, a planned Android camera that does look remarkably like the Nikon 1 series of mirrorless cameras. Announced this morning in a Japanese language press release on Nikon's Japanese website, the lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit seeks an injunction against both manufacture and sale of the Polaroid iM1836 digital camera.

Nikon notes in the press release that they tried to resolve the matter with Sakar, but did not come to a satisfactory conclusion (paraphrase). 

In our report from CES 2013, where Sakar announced the Polaroid iM1836, we noted more than once that the design reminded us of the Nikon 1 J-model cameras. We also noted how different the Polaroid design was in practical terms, with an Android operating system, a touchscreen, and interchangeable lenses that integrated a shutter and sensor. The camera was then expected to ship in the first quarter of 2013 for $399. 

The design in question is the Polaroid iM1836, an interchangeable lens camera with Android as its operating system. More unique is that each lens module has its own sensor and shutter mechanism.

Comments

Total comments: 159
12
makarandsaraf
By makarandsaraf (4 months ago)

Going by this state of events Olympus and Panasonic should have sued Nikon and Canon in the first place for copying the Micro-Four Thirds Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens cameras and all the other companies that followed suit after the launch of this design of cameras by Olympus and Panasonic. And we are not even talking about the other innovative ideas brought out by Olympus like Live-View in DSLRs,Dust Reduction systems etc.How about that !!!

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

Here's a thought. Instead of worrying about super-brand conscious Nikon customers accidentally buying a "Polaroid", perhaps Nikon could turn their lawyers loose on copies that really do create confusion, like counterfeit Nikon batteries.

0 upvotes
Jen Yates
By Jen Yates (4 months ago)

Wow, and there we were all thinking that this plastic piece of crap from China was actually a Nikon when it turns out it's just a travesty to the industry and another muddy splurge on what's left of 'Polaroid's' name.

Thankfully we have legal eagles saving us from the confusion of having a high quality camera and a rubbish piece of tat sharing the same body shape and colour.

Actually. Getting this camera off the market is the best think Nikon have done in ages! Not because it looks like a Nikon, just because it's awful!

0 upvotes
jaygeephoto
By jaygeephoto (6 months ago)

Considering what Polaroid did to it's retiree's (went bankrupt and stole their pensions - like Enron) I wouldn't buy a toilet brush with their name on it.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (6 months ago)

You can bet that this Polaroid isn't the same company as the one who stole the pension money.

That Polaroid went out of business. This Polaroid just bought the brand name from pension-stealing folks before they turned their lights off and locked the doors for the last time.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

You don't have to bet; it isn't the same company.

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (6 months ago)

maybe Nikon should sue other brands for placing a reflex mirror inside a DSLR...button on the upright corner and a LCD screen on the back...oh don't forget the battery is at the bottom too...

sure Nikon...why not?

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (6 months ago)

don't you find that the Sony A7 looks like a big brother to the V2, maybe Nikon will sue them too for the body shape and that ugly viewfinder on top. We are again in the same war as Apple lost it against Samsung, round corners, white color. If that continues, we sue anyone for having a digital screen at the back, a button that is bought at same company, having an sd slot on the same place, a battery that looks the same, and finally having produced a camera that looks like a camera, the list is endless. Nikon had, specially at this moment, better things to do.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
1 upvote
royston42
By royston42 (4 months ago)

I didn't think Nikon were the first to put a mirror inside ANY SLR, digital or film. Surely that was Exacta?

This is getting a little silly, isn't it?

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (6 months ago)

Is Nikon, seeing their revenues dwindling from point and shoots going to start acting like a patent troll company? The Polaroid body seems similar, but honestly, how many truly different shapes can you have in a stripped-down somewhat larger sensored camera? A rectangle is about the most basic shape and cameras built without grips or EVFs are going to look similar.

4 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (6 months ago)

Land is turning in his grave.

3 upvotes
RLPhotoAndImaging
By RLPhotoAndImaging (6 months ago)

Seems to me that Nikon is just looking to actually make some $ back from the cesspool that was the J1.

2 upvotes
Photoworks
By Photoworks (6 months ago)

Nikon would not exist today if they had not copied Zeiss designs from the 50's.

What comes around goes around!

7 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (6 months ago)

Yeh but Zeiss designs were worth copying.
Copying the Nikon 1 design is, uhm, 'flawed' or just masochistic?

0 upvotes
Photoworks
By Photoworks (6 months ago)

I agree. But it's the principle that counts.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (6 months ago)

it is the same principle that say that if a Banker from Luxembourg or Switzerland jumps out of the window, jump behind, there's money to earn there.

1 upvote
G Davidson
By G Davidson (6 months ago)

It is a total rip-off, so Nikon is right to go after them. It would have been better all along if they had reached some agreement where they'd expand the base of low-end Nikon 1 family compatible cameras and Nikon could sell lenses and accessories, a la m4/3. If m4/3 can eat into DSLR territory, this could take a big chunk of the otherwise shrinking compact market. Other partners could emerge too, the cheap 1-inch sensors making for varied, scalable designs.

But I guess that just makes too much sense and despite appearances, this was all just a copy.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (6 months ago)

Well, gee ... it's a dead ripoff of the J1 design. Since the Niukon 1 system is arguably rather unique in its design (and that is not even a good thing since the J1 has no grip to speak of) I fail to see why there is anything wrong with Nikon going after them to stop the ripoff. After all, they would have better ergonomics by adding a grip and then the issue would be solved.

7 upvotes
samfan
By samfan (6 months ago)

BTW since the cameras are indeed so eerily similar in details (strap holders, zoom ring etc.), I wonder if it doesn't indicate that Nikon actually used some off-the-shelf parts they found in some Chinese plant and just used them in order to make the N1 in the cheapest manner possible and then charge 800 € for them. I mean, the shoddy backs of the first two N1 cameras show this quite clearly.

Now Sakar may simply be using the same off-the-shelf parts and Nikon, seeing their mistake, reacts in the same way as they did with the D600 fiasco: claim innocence and throw the problem at someone else.

Sounds awfully like the usual steps of a corporation which smells its death in the air.

Shame, because Nikon could return to being the camera powerhouse they used to be. Instead they just wobble around in bullsh*t. As it is, it seems I won't be upgrading my Nikon DSLRs ever.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (6 months ago)

Interesting speculation, but you kind of lost me with your final comment. The Nikon 1 is overpriced for sure, but it is also a pretty innovative little product with some serious technology in there. And their dSLRs continue to lead the parade when it comes to ergonomics and performance (including image quality.) Not saying that they are the absolute epitome of professional cameras (although it is certainly arguable) but I don't understand how their faux pas in consumer land translate at all to issues in their dSLRs. I realize that there have been a few QC problems in the two big dogs, but the performance is certainly there.

4 upvotes
samfan
By samfan (6 months ago)

Well DSLRs hold quite well I suppose, though the baffling lack of a D300s successor, or a true D700 successor (i.e. for someone else than pixel peepers), or more DX lenses is an indication of how much they care about their user base. So is the presence of XQD cards in D4.

But regarding DSLRs, my biggest peeves are the QC issues - I live somewhere where Nikon warranty service is attrocious. In 2006 when I bought D200, it was worth risking and Nikon was known for being generally more reliable than Canons with AF issues and easily breakable cheap lenses. These days I woulnd't even exchange my D200 for a new Nikon SLR, let alone buy one.

But DSLRs aren't the biggest problem. Nikon just feels wrong now. The insanely overpriced N1 and Coolpix A show they either don't know what they're doing, or they have to struggle for every dime they can get.

Of course the V1 for 210 € nowadays is a sweet camera which I love but it is still quite a fail overall IMHO.

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (6 months ago)

Said the same thing when Nikon 1 came out and handled it in a store. Sure looks like it was ordered up from contractor components. That's why these cameras can come out so quickly. Lens units, shutter, basic circuit boards, the dials and icons, LCDs I expect can be ordered up-mixed and matched.

2 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (6 months ago)

I can see why Nikon's annoyed because it sure looks like the J2/J3/S1 in body shape and placement of some features. The guts are functionally different, but that is not relevant for the "infringement of the design patent and trade dress right owned by Nikon." However, it is very clearly marked as Polaroid iM1836.

I assume Nikon is worried that it will lower their brand image. However, the only real harm I can see is potential confusion about compatibility. That's still enough reason to sue, I guess....

0 upvotes
joejack951
By joejack951 (6 months ago)

Nikon filed for a design patent for a reason. It doesn't matter what harm the infringing camera model could do to their sales; the fact that [they believe] it infringes on their patent (which didn't come free) means they can sue.

0 upvotes
Ferling
By Ferling (6 months ago)

I've been a design engineer for some six + years, and I frequented the patent database and can tell you how it's nearly impossible to avoid infringing another these days. While common sense might suggest that average folks know that they're not going to purchase a Polaroid thinking it's a Nikon.

However, it's irrelevant in court, and depends on the wording of the patent and the nth degree that Sakar is duplicating. I'm not siding with Sakar on this, patent searches are common sense tasks for designers. I would be curious if Sakar also patented the same shape, and if that was accepted. Wouldn't surprise me.

5 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (6 months ago)

Anybody can sue... but the litigation easily could cost more than it's worth if they can't collect damages. I just don't see this being worth Nikon's effort. I guess Nikon sees Sakar differently? ;-)

0 upvotes
joejack951
By joejack951 (6 months ago)

Design patents, as opposed to utility patents, don't rely on wording. Design patents are strictly superficial appearances, not even any particular size (design

0 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (6 months ago)

All this free publicity for Sakar! I bet they are pleased as punch with Nikon!

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

This article has to hold the record for unintelligent comments.

7 upvotes
jurgenvogt
By jurgenvogt (6 months ago)

No, I think that was the Adobe CC comments. But this one is certainly a close second.

0 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (6 months ago)

Thanks for your insight.

2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

You are welcome, groucher. Pleasure to be of service.

0 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (6 months ago)

@jurgenvogt
That is disappointing. I was hoping for the record so we must try harder.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (6 months ago)

tkbslc should get the DPreview intelligence spotting prize, and IP law should be included in intelligence tests :-)

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

White orbs, by far. You may recall, these were the reason Fuji went out of business last year.

0 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (6 months ago)

I thought Apple held the World rights to the rectangle. It is all very confusing.

The problem nowadays is that life is a comedy performed by people without a trace of humour.

7 upvotes
Tan68
By Tan68 (6 months ago)

Nothing to be gained by using hyperbole.

It isn't the rectangle that Apple owns. It is the rectangle with curves. The curves were the key...

Apple curves. When was the last time you heard 'apple cheeks'. Been a couple years, right? Curves, again.

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (6 months ago)

Tell that to Canon Powershot cameras. Or maybe Canon preceded Apple.

0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (6 months ago)

If Sakar has infringed Nikon's patents, the courts will decide. But I think DPReview is missing the bigger picture. Clearly, different classes of cameras have many commonalities, right down to those control rings around the lens bezel on the enthusiast compacts. Who really designs and assembles Nikon's or Pentax's, etc. latest and greatest P&S.

Looks like many contractors are becoming OEMs, buying up or licensing languished brand names like Kodak, GE, Bell & Howell, Honeywell, Polaroid, etc. I think they would be better off with new names, but that isn't the issue here.

It's interesting how quickly 3rd party digital cameras can be developed. And, here, Sakar is following Rioch, the only other entity to explore what is an outstanding concept-lens/sensor,even shutter modules.

1 upvote
Tan68
By Tan68 (6 months ago)

I haven't been able to understand the lens/sensor combo unit.

Lens only and I can use it on other camera bodies I buy. Bodies with updated sensors.

Lens+sensor unit makes sense if the person will not desire an updated sensor.. at some point...

Considering the lens+sensor packages as a sort of camera without interchangeable lenses such as a point/shoot makes sense to me. With both, when you want to upgrade the sensor, all the rest gets passed down to a relative... They are both more disposable than true ILC...

The lens+sensor packages seem to cost more and they aren't ILC. Not really. Not if all of it is thrown away to upgrade a sensor.

Later in the life of the product, Ricoh made a mount module. Different from a lens+sensor module.

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (6 months ago)

Tan.... and you saw how wildly successful the Ricoh GXR was.

Combining lens and sensor is a pretty stupid idea, and every so often some manufacturer is willing to demonstrate it again for the rest of us.

The Leica M mount module did make a lot more sense. But is this any different than buying a $20 Leica M mount adapter for a M4/3, NEX, or Fuji X camera?

I suppose it is, because you have to buy a sensor again, so rather than spending $20 for an adapter, you spend $499 for an adapter with a sensor built in.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (6 months ago)

Now we know, what Nikon (and Canon) has been doing; rather than honest competition. Why not make better, and yes more affordable cameras, instead?

Vote no, to the idea police. Guess who pays for this legal expense. THE BUYERS!

7 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (6 months ago)

That's kind of funny ... vote no to the "idea" police, which presumably means that when Polaroid had the "idea" to design a camera that by an incredible fluke has identical lines for both body and lenses to the J1, they were *not* simply ripping Nikon off for *lack* of a unique idea :-)

Seriously ... the irony in your comment is wonderful ...

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (6 months ago)

What's sad, is you don't get it. I agree; it looks like a knock-off; but I say that does not give anyone the right, to stamp out, that (so inferred) competition. What is it hurting? Who thought they were buying a Nikon? Are we looking after retarded people's camera buying experience?

No, the much larger point here, is IP (Intellectual Property) laws are going to reach around, and bite us all, right in the rear. Starting with YOUR money holder. This is more anti-competition; in a world with very little, already.

LET THE BEST CAMERA WIN!

It's that simple. Once you start assigning ownership, of photographic benefits, and to one company, then we've all lost. In fact, we have already lost; by what's not offered today; due to fear of lawsuits. Just exactly how is a new camera manufacturer, suppose to come-up, and compete, with that?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
instamatic
By instamatic (6 months ago)

So why Nikon didn't build a camera like this in the first place? To me the Sakar camera looks like what the Nikon 1 should have been. Let's see, it has a body with a programmable operating system, and WI-FI built in. It has replaceable sensors since they are integrated into the lenses. Looks like a very innovative idea (and why we still don't have it in the mainstream cameras?). It makes one keep the body while updating the software, and only replacing the lens/sensor modules as newer and better ones are released, and needed by the photographer.

2 upvotes
Cyrille Berger
By Cyrille Berger (6 months ago)

No one did it because it is a bad idea. The ability to change a sensor is a good idea (and nikom recently patented something to that effect), but changing the lens and the sensor at the same time does not bring any advantage. In the contrary, it forces you to buy all lenses again and again if you want to benefit from improvement in the sensor.

2 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (6 months ago)

Changing the sensor with the lens? That's insane ... the cost of unnecessary parts in the lenses would make kit lenses cost what professional dSLR lenses cost, and who would benefit from that?

1 upvote
Polytropia
By Polytropia (6 months ago)

This camera runs Android right? I'm detecting a trend here... LOL.

PS... Anyone in this comments thread who ever posted a criticism against Apple for suing Samsung must now write a similar tirade against Nikon for suing Sakar...

2 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (6 months ago)

I've criticised Apple in the past for their unethical patenting of curves and for being unable to think up an original name for their company.

Sakar's actions are an attempt to fool inexperienced customers into buying what appears to be a Nikon related product. This is much more serious than merely copying the look of the camera as it's akin to counterfeiting. Nikon are right to sue in this case. Having said that, the utterly stupid idea of sticking the sensor in the lens will render the Polaroid a non-starter so maybe Nikon don't need to waste their money.

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (6 months ago)

I don't think Polaroid sold any single im1836 anywhere. Nikon just want the publicity for their not so popular Nikon 1. I've just seen Nikon J1 with 10-30 lens dirt cheap at Target at $200, and nobody is buying them.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (6 months ago)

Considering that the Nikon 1-series is one of the all-time top-notch "DOG CAMERA" finalist of all times.... I suppose the thinking with Nikon was, hey, this could generate us some publicity. It already did -- just not goodwill for Nikon.

The Sakar-Polaroid camera looks a whole lot sleeker, i clearly superior in technology and OS to that lame duck Nikon J-cam, and costs a whole lot less money to boot. So, perhaps it is no wonder than down-on-its-luck Nkon felt they had to "revive" the dwindling fortunes of the 1-series by filing this lawsuit.

4 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (6 months ago)

Francis, would you happen to be using an Android phone?

3 upvotes
Optimal Prime
By Optimal Prime (6 months ago)

Would be nice if Nikon was equally proactive in addressing their customers' concerns...

D600 ring a bell?

8 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (6 months ago)

Nikon should be happy with the Sakar look alike. Maybe some who go to buy the Polaroid will buy the Nikon by mistake.

The real breakthrough with the Polaroid is a rectangular hole in the body so light that can't get to that point from the lens, can hit a sensor that is not there.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
Ferling
By Ferling (6 months ago)

Oh darn. I wanted to buy a Nikon lookalike that wasn't actually a Nikon. Why can't we live in a world where Samsung's can also look like iPhone's? Oh, the humanity! :)

4 upvotes
wildkat2
By wildkat2 (6 months ago)

In related news Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus and Pentax sued by Contax for infringing on the Zeiss Ikon VEB Contax S.

3 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (6 months ago)

Did they patent a white camera with a lens release in the lower right corner and some Grey parts? If so then the problem is that they never should have been able to patent something so generic in the first place.

9 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (6 months ago)

Did Apple patent a grey wedge-shaped laptop with black chicklet keys? No. But they do have a number of design patents to cover specific parts of the Macbook Air, right down to the shape of the rubber feet.

Same thing here. All kinds of specific hings, like the strap lugs , lens indicator carat, etc etc are so close to the design of the J1 that if Nikon has any patents on this at all they will have an easy time of it in court.

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (6 months ago)

All of the things that are similar are cosmetic. However, we all know that being right does not win court cases. A good lawyer wins court cases. My guess is that they will eventually settle out of court for whatever the lawyer’s fees would have cost.

5 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (6 months ago)

Beavis, Butthead, The Legend continues... Cheers! :)... + :) :) :) :) etc.

0 upvotes
SWSF14
By SWSF14 (6 months ago)

The color white, I'm suing!!!

6 upvotes
barry reid
By barry reid (6 months ago)

Lets see oblong with curved ends and hole for a lens on the front, screen on the back shutter button on top... Maybe Leica can sue them both given that they obviously ripped off the M, X and D-Lux series.

Dumb.

5 upvotes
Glen Barrington
By Glen Barrington (6 months ago)

Nikon, Apple Same-o, same-o! Can't innovate? Litigate!

5 upvotes
Ulfric M Douglas
By Ulfric M Douglas (6 months ago)

The camera body is oblong, and the lens is cylindrical : SUE them!
Nikon are being right muppets. Doh.

7 upvotes
SunnyFlorida
By SunnyFlorida (6 months ago)

I guess Nikon has to turn a profit on the 1-lemon somehow

7 upvotes
Todd Ka
By Todd Ka (6 months ago)

I guess that is one way to recover their R&D budget.

0 upvotes
papparazzi
By papparazzi (6 months ago)

We should sue them for the D600?

6 upvotes
Prairie Pal
By Prairie Pal (6 months ago)

I think Swiffer has a case against Nikon for the D600. But yah...Nikon suing someone else? Oh the irony!

4 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (6 months ago)

I wonder how many of the gearhead here actually read Nikon 1's review so they know what the 1 series looks like.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (6 months ago)

Everybody did. And you?

3 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (6 months ago)

With so many "photographers" jabbing at Nikon 1 and support "Polaroid', why don't you put your money where yout mouth is and go out and buy an iM1836?

I have seen about equal number of Nikon 1 and m4/3 camera on the street of New York and according to Amazon they are selling well. Just because their user might not be pro-gearhead like you means squat.

6 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (6 months ago)

Nikon 1-series = dog-cam.

3 upvotes
Zigadiboom
By Zigadiboom (6 months ago)

Well Im going to sue Nikon in a class action lawsuit due to them releasing the new D610 under the pretext of it being an updated model over the D600. I will provide the following equation to the presiding judge.

D600 - Oil - Dust + 0.5fps + market exploitation = D610

11 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (6 months ago)

Nikon's Legal Department must have gotten hit with so many lawsuits filed against the company lately.... they decided to launch one of their own, for a change.

1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (6 months ago)

does this mean that Leica can sue Fuji.. or maybe Nikon and Canon can sue each other.. or Sony suing Oly

2 upvotes
phips243
By phips243 (6 months ago)

Why should Leica sue Fuji? The X-series doesn't even closely resemble Leicas...rather Contax...and Fuji's hybrid viewfinder (especially the X-Pro1's) is lightyears ahead of what Leica ever could come up with...

0 upvotes
phips243
By phips243 (6 months ago)

Oh...and it's not as if Fuji didn't have a history in range-finders..

0 upvotes
Lucas_
By Lucas_ (6 months ago)

Hehe...Sony, instead of suing Oly, decided to buy part of it... and they're now sharing technology. I guess we saw that some years ago, between Sony and Minolta!

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

One of the more obvious design ripoffs in recent times. The lens is a clone of the 10-30 VR and the body of the J1. Nikon should win this suit easily.

10 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (6 months ago)

Yeah... I don't know what the uproar is for. When I saw that Polaroid announcement I very literally thought it was a 100% Nikon camera licensed under the polaroid name.

Of course, things being what they are in the business world, it may have been, and the lawsuit is actually over some stupid contractual obligation. Who knows. Who cares.

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

A "reasonable person" would find that a rip off product.

0 upvotes
Mahmoud Mousef
By Mahmoud Mousef (6 months ago)

An unusually high return rate was evident in the retailers we interviewed.

"Customers thought the thing would spit out instant prints", a retailer we interviewed said. "I've been repackaging these for re-sale like a monkey all day..."

Neither Polaroid or Nikon could be reached for comment at press time.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Lucas_
By Lucas_ (6 months ago)

The Nikon 1 camera/system was never a contender in face of Sony's NEX and mainly the RX100/M2. The Sakar/Polaroid system, though having a Nikon 1 look, is very different with the in-lens sensor and shutter ( maybe Ricoh should be suing Sakar... ). Looks like Nikon needed something to make their system get some media coverage!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

Nikon is in fourth place overall in the worldwide sales ranking on the strength of their Nikon 1 system.

Fujifilm, Samsung, Pentax, Canon, Ricoh all sell less MILCs than Nikon. In an extremely competitive MILC market, if that's not being in contention, I'm not sure what is.

5 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (6 months ago)

Related question: If Nikon is indeed FOURTH.... and yet they sell MORE than either Fuji, Samsung, Pentax, Ricoh, and even Canon.... then pray tell, WHICH ARE THE OTHER THREE CAMERA MFRS THAT SELL MORE?

Okay, so one could be Sony, and then the other two? Please? Maybe Sigma and Leica or...???

1 upvote
shark81
By shark81 (6 months ago)

Olympus and Panasonic.

1 upvote
luxor2
By luxor2 (6 months ago)

Quite obvious, lens on front, lcd on back, tripod socket on bottom, how else could the Polaroid be configured? lens on bottom?

5 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

You sound like Mr. McDowell on Coming to America. "No, McDonald's has the Golden Arches, we have the Yellow M."

1 upvote
olyflyer
By olyflyer (6 months ago)

Wow. That is indeed an almost identical copy of the J1.

6 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (6 months ago)

Everybody sue everyone else on the planet, lets have a sue party! C'mon it will be fun, why not!?

Was that an oddball comment? Yes.

6 upvotes
Todd Ka
By Todd Ka (6 months ago)

Because the Nikon 1 has been such a hit...

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

Must be if Chinese companies are cloning it.

0 upvotes
Todd Ka
By Todd Ka (6 months ago)

They are still cloning Encad printers, so who knows what they are thinking.

1 upvote
Opinionator
By Opinionator (6 months ago)

Desperate move by Nikon.

4 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (6 months ago)

No, expected move by Nikon. If you do not go after copycats, the commies win.

3 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (6 months ago)

Nikon, get real! The danger is the Sony A7 and A7r, not the Polaroid iM1836!

By the way, for over 50 years Nikon called itself Kogaku Kogyo Kabushikigaisha Nippon ("Japan Optical Industries Co., Ltd."). Perhaps the Japanese government should sue Nikon for plagiarizing the name of the country itself.

7 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (6 months ago)

I was kind of siding against Nikon here until I looked at what I presume to be the zoom ring. Exact same shape, design, nearly everything. Definitely the same visual impression, so Nikon have my blessing to sue the crap out of Sakar. Btw, the interchangeable lens+sensor concept is not new. Ricoh did it in their GXR.

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (6 months ago)

Nikon - how about innovating, paying more to engineers, not lawyers?

12 upvotes
falconeyes
By falconeyes (6 months ago)

It seems they do. Which is why they protect innovations by patents and design work by design patents. Seems Sakar infringed their US design patent. Nikon cannot but sue in such a case. It simply is against the law to infringe design patents. Design patents serve to keep products distinguishable which isn't a bad thing.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (6 months ago)

What innovation created by engineers they protect by this lawsuit?

1 upvote
Total comments: 159
12