
GoPro Plunges After Apple Gains Remote Camera Patent - dotluis
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-13/gopro-plunges-after-apple-gains-remote-camera-patent.html
======
jws
Headlines aside, this isn't a patent on remote cameras.

The patent is about using multiple wireless links to control a remote camera.
Think Bluetooth-LE and WiFi. You let the camera go into a low power mode when
not being used and wake it up through the Bluetooth-LE.

It's a stupid patent to grant. It is the first half baked sentence that would
come out of my mouth if you had asked me in 2012 to make an intermittently
used camera last longer on battery. I'd have had to talk to someone about
power draw of imaging elements before I added a second low power sensor like
in claim 10. But, it isn't a patent on remote cameras.

~~~
eyesee
This isn't a patent. It's a published patent application. Says so right on it.
In fact, all US patent numbers that start with a year and month
("201302.....") are patent applications.

Patent applications are published 18 months after they are received by the
patent office, before they have even been reviewed. Patents may not even be
reviewed for 2+ years.

It's most unfortunate that the press who write such articles don't have a
basic understanding of patents or the process involved.

Going even further, there is evidence that this is actually a patent filed by
Kodak before they sold their portfolio to Apple. Previous patents by these
inventors were assigned to Kodak. So there is no indication that Apple has any
interest in such a product.

~~~
jws
Excellent points. Silly me for believing _any_ of the words in the headline.

------
crazypyro
Why is there no mention of this story that the same author wrote 4 days ago?

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-09/gopro-ceo-
woodman-s...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-09/gopro-ceo-woodman-sees-
stock-grant-swell-to-270-million.html)

It presents an entirely different view on GoPro and its volatility. I guess
its not surprising since it dampens the main point of this article and makes
it quite a bit more of a stretch.

~~~
vikramhaer
Not sure I see how it's relevant to the discussion... The article you linked
talks about Woodman's stock grants, and mentions how stock option repricing is
used primarily by companies with volatile stock prices. The price hit the
stock took would lower the value of Woodman's grants, so I don't feel like
that article really dampens the main point in any way... Would you mind
clarifying?

------
abat
I don't think GoPro went down because of the threat of the patent. Rather,
investors are afraid Apple will start to compete against GoPro. People are
seeing the patent as a possible product roadmap not a legal threat.

~~~
ghaff
I have no idea if GoPro stock is overvalued, undervalued, or just right. But I
will say that they've had a really nice run with a product that IMO is not all
that great (terrible UI among other things) by plugging themselves into the
adventure sports lifestyle. And, probably more importantly, those who like to
think of themselves as being part of the adventure sports lifestyle--whether
they do or not.

~~~
Someone1234
I've always been surprised GoPro are as popular as they are.

Before GoPro was even a known brand you could easily buy extremely similar
items (small plastic cameras with one-two button(s)) off of eBay straight from
China which cost under $50. They often came with generic stick on clips for
motorcycle helmets and similar.

This entire market existed for years before GoPro suddenly appeared. All GoPro
did was package up the generic product from China, increased the price by
100%, and then used all the extra revenue to buy a ton of adverts.

People often like to claim that GoPro won because it was optically better, but
that just isn't accurate. Up until maybe the HERO3+/HERO4 (2013/2014) the line
was actually quite behind some generics. The only reason GoPro even got their
act together was that some other named vendors started getting into the
"action camera" market.

Even today GoPro seems insanely expensive, for the price of a single GoPro
HERO4 SILVER[0] with a basic plastic case you can buy the same spec camera on
eBay for $65 [1] with enough money left over for a [bad] DSLR by
Canon/Nikon/Sony/etc [2].

[0] [http://www.amazon.com/GoPro-
CHDHY-401-HERO4-SILVER/dp/B00NIY...](http://www.amazon.com/GoPro-
CHDHY-401-HERO4-SILVER/dp/B00NIYJF6U/) [1] [http://www.ebay.com/itm/Black-
SJ4000-Full-HD-1080P-Waterproo...](http://www.ebay.com/itm/Black-SJ4000-Full-
HD-1080P-Waterproof-Helmet-Action-Sports-Camera-12MP-as-GoPro-/251768803544)
[2] [http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Interchangeable-Digital-
Camera-18...](http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Interchangeable-Digital-
Camera-18-55mm/dp/B00EH5UGR6/)

------
51Cards
There has to be a boatload of prior-art around this.

~~~
SixSigma
The Sony QX10 for a start

[http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/lens-style-camera](http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/lens-
style-camera)

I've not read the patent but I can zoom and do some basic camera controls,
capture stills and record video - all wirelessly from my Sony Phone (Xperia Z1
in my case)

EDIT : I just read the patent, it's from 2012. It all seems like the obvious
stuff one would write if asked "write the manual of controlling a camera
wirelessly"

------
smackfu
Here's a write-up of the details: [http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-
apple/2015/01/apple-gr...](http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-
apple/2015/01/apple-granted-a-patent-for-a-superior-gopro-like-camera-
system.html)

~~~
patentAbuse
That site is so absolutely terrible I created an account just to post a link
to the actual patent (something patentlyapple goes out of its way not to do).

[https://www.google.ca/patents/US20130235222](https://www.google.ca/patents/US20130235222)

Simply incredible that they take the figures from the patent and then
_watermark_ them.

It seems that the concerns of the GoPro camp are not that Apple is going to
start extorting with the patent, but rather that Apple has shown specific
interest in GoPro's market, specifically noting it several times in their
patent application.

------
datashovel
More proof that today the patent system is here to serve large corporations.

~~~
chrismcb
What proof (or evidence) that the system is here to serve large corporations?
This is an application, anyone who wants to waste money can apply for just
about anything. Doesn't mean it will be granted.

------
winston84
One day, someone's gonna patent the sun.

