Regarding Canon RF dispute with Viltrox. Intellectual property violation, Canon says.

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Wing2 Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: That's not what "anti-competitive" means

Karl_Guttag wrote:

A patent on the communication protocol would not necessarily have to give the specific implementation away. A good patent would be more generic and broadly applied, but this is a special case as Canon is probably not worried about Sony or Nikon copying their protocol.

A  communication protocol is actually quite difficult to get a patent issued by the patent office.

A patent cannot have prior arts, cannot be obvious and need to be innovative.

Just making a protocol nobody has done before is easy, but that only will guarantee you get granted a copyright if it was just being different from others. (= no prior arts)

Need something  innovative and not obvious such as your protocol can communicate faster or more reliable than previously known protocols

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
KEG
KEG
KEG
KEG
KEG
KEG
KEG
KEG
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow