Amazon Patents Studio Photography

[Browncoat]

I'm only somewhat familiar with patent law, because I filed one myself many years ago. Here is what I know:

First, this is a real patent. Yes, it was approved. Here is the link to it.

The amount of extreme detail that you need to file for a patent is staggering. They want to know everything down to the very smallest detail. In order to file for a patent, your idea has to be "novel" or "not widely known or accepted". On the surface, this sounds ludicrous, given that photographers have been working with white seamless backdrops for many years prior to this. However:

If you read through some of the text of the patent, Amazon is very specific about their setup:

• 85mm lens
• ISO 320
• f/5.6
• heights of elevated platforms for lighting
• etc

In order to infringe on this patent, you would have to have a setup exactly as specified here, which would be nearly impossible unless you were making every effort to replicate it.

Conspiracy theorists and tin foil hat wearers can breathe a sigh of relief on this one.

 

[jdeg]

I'm going to guess that they only filed this patent because they are intending to sell some kind of lighting package that includes tips on settings for the camera. If you think of it that way it makes perfect sense.

 

[Browncoat]

A patent must give very specific examples (such as the f/5.6, ISO 320) however the claim is not limited only to those settings. This is merely a specific example and was not intended to limit the scope of their claim. The goal of any patent is to write it as general as possible so as to broad enough to cover as much ground as is it can. Their lawyers would argue very successfully that f/5.6 was merely one of many possible examples as was the ISO.

Agreed, and you do have a point. However, I disagree regarding their lawyers being able to successfully argue against a claim.

In order for Amazon to be able to fulfill the "novelty" requirement of patent filing, the patent office researchers would've had to try to find existing documentation on a similar setup and failed. I'm quite certain that such details are widely available in both print and online media. There are many photographers and photo blog white seamless backdrop setups available, we've all seen them. That's why there's such sticker shock associated with this patent.

And that's what leaves me scratching my head. What is Amazon's motivation here?

Surely it's not against the little guy. It wouldn't be worth their time (or $$$) to pursue litigation against people like you and me. No, it has to be against other major online retailers who Amazon believes are using "their patented product photo techniques". This patent filing is from 2011. I haven't read of any big stink that arose from it in the last 3 years, has anyone else?

[EDIT]

Yeah, @jdeg might have nailed it as well.

 

[Dave_W]

Well, if the details were already published then the patent claim would be declined. I think this patent might have something to do with protection rather than enforcement, but who knows.

 

[Browncoat]

Well, if the details were already published then the patent claim would be declined. I think this patent might have something to do with protection rather than enforcement, but who knows.

That's kind of my point, Dave.

https://www.google.com/#q=zack+arias+white+seamless

Zack Arias' multi-part tutorial is how I based my own setup. It's dated April 29, 2008.

This was performed with a simple Google search. I have to assume that the US Patent Office has the means to do an in-depth search for this kind of stuff, but someone clearly dropped the ball on this one. These tutorials are just a few of what has to be hundreds, if not thousands already out there. I could probably come up with at least 50 in just a few minutes.

 

[Browncoat]