 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 5
Why would Canon apply for a patent for an old discontinued, no longer in production zoom lens: 28-70mm f2.8L?
It has long been replaced by the newer 24-70mm f2.8L...
Could this be the range Canon is thinking of putting the IS?
http://photorumors.com/2010/08/11/ca...oRumors.com%29
"The greatest camera in the world is the one you hold in your hands when shit happens." ©2007 Raoul Isidro
I don’t understand ... the patent of a lent with specify zoom?
Anyway, the information is interesting.
Regards.
J. Arguello.
Constructive Criticism (CC) is alsways welcome.
Photography gear: Nikon D7000; Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8; Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5 - 5.6; Tamron A17 70-300mm f/4 - 5.6; Nikkor 50mm f/1.8; Yongnuo 35mm f/2; Neewer 85mm f/1.8; Nikon AW100 ;Canon EOS 300; Tamron 28-105mm; Canon 75-300mm.
Photo Editing: Nikon Capture NX-D , GIMP ;
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arguelloflores/
You have to realise that the patent system is broken, and I mean a total train wreck.
The root cause being under funding.
They get so many applications that they basically rubber stamp them and wait for a challenge when needed.
So a lot of patents are either a) not inventive (new idea) or b) have prior art that no one cross checks.
It's worse for software patents.
Why do companies do it?
To build up a big patent portfolio so if someone tries to sue you you can counter with a bag of patents of your own.
IBM have the largest patent portfolio on the planet.
Microsoft not far behind. Eg. Microsoft patented double tapping on a PDA - what the?
So what happens is: Say Nikon sued Canon because they thought Canon had nicked one of their ideas,
Canon would counter sue with something of their own patents.
Then it gets locked up in court for 5-10 years and the only people that are happy are patent lawyers.
A big patent portfolio is a protection mechanism.
So the link above is in and of itself mostly meaningless. To read anything into it is of negligible value.
Patents are also a great way to keep smaller/new players out of the market..
I agree wholeheartedly with Kym, other than to add that there are often quite legitimate and strategic "protective" reasons for a patent, particularly in this world where cheap knock-offs seem to be the rule rather than the exception.
Even though the lens might be out of production for Canon, if someone came along and manufactured an exact as can be copy and started selling it at a third of the price, then perhaps sales of the new ones would suffer.
Maybe it has something to do with the original patent expiring? I think in the US they last around 20 years which seems about right for this lens.
Reply With Quote
Add To Bookmarks
