Litepanels Patent

[Terry Wall]

Hi, Gang! Today I saw on the "News" tab of DVInfo that the International Trade Commission ruled in favor of Litepanels' patent on "... importation into the US of LED lighting products for film, video or photography...." The article also cites that companies that properly license this technology (from Litepanels) will be allowed to continue to market & sell their respective products. Hopefully this clause will permit--and not limit or prohibit--fair and reasonable competition, which will only benefit us all. **Full disclosure** I own a couple of the Litepanels MicroPro units, so I'm a fan...but...I'm also not opposed to seeing what healthy competition can do to influence the cost of LED lighting.

What say you, mates on the forum?

~TW

[Chris Hurd]

The link Terry refers to is this:

Litepanels Patent Defense Upheld by International Trade Commission at DV Info Net

The relevant takeaway is this:

Contrary to the substantial amount of misinformation surrounding this case, the General Exclusion Order will not affect... LED lighting used for film, video or photography such as RGB and Remote Phosphor technologies. It simply prohibits the importation into the United States of LED lighting products for film, video or photography that infringe certain claims of the Litepanels patents without the patent holder’s consent.

Of the fourteen (14) companies named in the complaint, all of the major manufacturers have taken the professional route and chosen to license its intellectual property to continue manufacturing LED lighting products for sale in the United States.

[Arthur Gannis]

Can someone please explain that importation into the US part. If the units are made in US with US components and US assemblers, and sold in US, would that still be infringing on their turf ? IF so, then why mention the importation bit ?

[Les Wilson]

If your product infringes on the LitePanels patent, then it infringes and is subject to whatever legal action LitePanels chooses under US law. This thread is about the LitePanels action on the foreign companies that were infringing.

[Arthur Gannis]

Great to hear that. The word I wanted to see is “foreign“
Now I can setup shop here in the good ol' USA, manufacturing and selling my LED lights for use in the Video, Photography, Broadcast industry using US parts with US Labor with a label on them marked “Made in USA“.
Importing nothing and selling ( EXporting) them to anyone who wants them anywhere on earth.

[Tom Morrow]

Patents should be for things that aren't obvious. LED panels are obvious. Just because litepanels was the first to get it right doesn't mean they should lock up the market. I own some litepanels knockoffs, which I'm selling because the implementation is inferior to litepanels. This is how the market should work... if you want to stay in front you keep building better products.

[Simon Wood]

Originally Posted by Arthur Gannis

Great to hear that. The word I wanted to see is “foreign“
Now I can setup shop here in the good ol' USA, manufacturing and selling my LED lights for use in the Video, Photography, Broadcast industry using US parts with US Labor with a label on them marked “Made in USA“.
Importing nothing and selling ( EXporting) them to anyone who wants them anywhere on earth.

I think you missed the point a bit. If you manufacture anything that infringes on Litepanels patents then you will have to license those patents. Good business practice, at least if you want to avoid a lawsuit (bearing in mind that your statements here have made it clear that you are aware of these patents; the lawyers would have a field day.)

Originally Posted by Tom Morrow

Patents should be for things that aren't obvious. LED panels are obvious. Just because litepanels was the first to get it right doesn't mean they should lock up the market. I own some litepanels knockoffs, which I'm selling because the implementation is inferior to litepanels. This is how the market should work... if you want to stay in front you keep building better products.

Defining whats obvious and whats not obvious would be fairly difficult in a court; its way too fluid a term, there has to be a clear distinction. Everything is obvious after its been designed, and thats the reason we have patents.

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Tom Morrow

....Just because litepanels was the first to get it right doesn't mean they should lock up the market. ...

This is a myth. Litepanels doesn't have a patent on LED based lights. Read up on it. Here's a start: Litepanels Intellectual Property Statement

[Eric Olson]

Originally Posted by Arthur Gannis

Great to hear that. The word I wanted to see is “foreign“
Now I can setup shop here in the good ol' USA, manufacturing and selling my LED lights for use in the Video, Photography, Broadcast industry using US parts with US Labor with a label on them marked “Made in USA“.
Importing nothing and selling ( EXporting) them to anyone who wants them anywhere on earth.

LOL, you've got it backwards. You can set up a factory anyplace but in the States and export your light panels to anyplace but the States.

[Arthur Gannis]

The Verdict Is In… |

I am just going on from what has been written,

“It simply prohibits the importation into the United States of LED lighting products for film, video or photography that infringe certain claims of the Litepanels patents without the patent holder’s consent.“

If the product is made entirely within the US ( parts, labor, packaging, etc.), then there is NO IMPORTATION whatsoever into the US.
No importation, no problem.

So what you are saying is if I open a manufacturing shop in Canada, then I can export them to any place on earth except US of A.?
Sweet. Thank you for the idea. !