3 ms·

Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? I'm not defending their IP practices, but this is not as stupid as it seems. Nikon knew about the pat

Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? I'm not defending their IP practices, but this is not as stupid as it seems. Nikon knew about the patents when they designed their cameras. The patents were not dumb in 2007-2008. Claims like the one excerpted are part of larger claim sets; if any claim gets invalidated, the rest that rely on it are useless. For the sake of being explicit, but also robust, lawyers will take a technical description and devolve it into a series of nested claims. Those individual claims, in isolation, sound dumb. But they're usually contingent on earlier claims that might reveal the novelty. (I have not read the patent.)

wmf 4y ago
There's a conversation to be had about how much money Red is making from selling luxury goods to amateurs but this thread probably isn't the best place.
Teever 4y ago
> Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? Really? I think you know like everyone else here what consumer means in this context, it's not literally about consuming food, or the disease known as consumption, and that entities that aren't individual consumers in the nightly news sense of the word are called 'consumers' as well. In this instance semantics isn't insightful.
zeusk 4y ago
Because anti-competition is anti-consumer. isn't the whole basis of capitalism that capital drives competition which drives innovation and consumerism?
zamalek 4y ago
> Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? Everything is consumer these days. CNC machines, milling machines, soldering stations, tablesaws, planers, and, yes, high-end cinematic cameras. You're no longer talking about Hollywood and maybe 4 or 5 other big studios leveraging this stuff. Marques Brownlee, Linus Tech Tips, Corridor, and tons of other Youtubers (and I'm sure many more from other platforms) eat these things like candy. If you or I wanted to get into this stuff, we reasonably could with a little financial discipline (and maybe bargaining with our significant other :D). They are unimaginably vulnerable to someone coming along with a platform that accepts any, say, NVME, with some form of "works best with" certification system. That way, if your risk is low ( enthused hobbyist) go with your MLC dumpster diving special, if your risk is high then go with OEM, certified, or better (because there is better storage than what Red offers). Keep in mind that Red have supplanted a stupidly broken industry with a vastly less broken industry, but on the absolute scale they are still pretty fucking stupid. They are living on the time it takes for someone to realize that, given a huge amount of R&D into a sensor (because Red is likely the leading sensor), a more capitalist/competitive approach exists.
- detaro 4y ago
  > Marques Brownlee, Linus Tech Tips, Corridor, are not consumers but media businesses.
  - voidwtf 4y ago
    When did the consumer stop being the ones who consume the product? I’m sure many farmers would consider John Deere’s practices regarding DIY repairs, anti-consumer, as they are the consumers. Any person who might reasonable be considered an end-user of a product, or might buy a type of product might be considered a consumer of that type of product. Anti-consumerism and protectionism do not even require that you be a customer of the company in question, some practices extend beyond the product itself when the company seeks to stifle competition.
  - zamalek 4y ago
    That line between "business" and "consumer" is becoming increasingly indistinct. This is the very nature of "influencers." We have every-day-joes/janes setting up multi-thousand dollar machines in their own (or rented) garage for their own, or followers', enjoyment. > are not consumers but media businesses. This idea of yours is extremely out of touch with reality, just like Red are. Those "media businesses" would be nowhere without an engaged audience. The modern audience are participators, not watchers. Commodity 3D printers have succeeded for a reason. People aren't as one-dimensional as they used to be. They take their interests to an extreme degree. It might take a videography/cinematography enthusiast 2 years to save up for a Red, but they will.
    - jrockway 4y ago
      Influencers are businesses, plain and simple. They buy the camera to make a profit. Compare this to someone like me, who also owns expensive cameras, but I have them to take pictures and show my friends. I plan to make $0 from this endeavor. I'm a consumer, not a business.
      - zamalek 4y ago
KaiserPro 4y ago
RED have some very nice people. However, the product was/is okay-ishm but the fan boys are utterly toxic pricks. the charged for everything, made special names for all sorts, and had tesla levels of bullshit when it came to deadlines and capabilities. For example, the "RED ray" laser projector, which supposedly was a 4k native laser based projector, except that it wasn't, never ran at 4k during NAB and if I recall correctly at some point was replaced by a barco. (https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/126579-red-ray-4k-cinema-laser-projector-on-display-at-nab-show-2012 https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/126579-red-ray-4k-ci...) They made "redrockets" that were supposedly super high tech decoding cards, but were in reality rebadged from another company. They were extra ordinarily fragile (I personally accidentally killed 3 in just one event) and fucking expensive (£4k each) It was me, apparently that was the problem, not the design. In the same event I replaced graphics cards, a boat load of Fusion IoDrives, none of them died. So yes, they were anti-consumer to a certain extent. However if they liked you, they'd invite you to the ranch, you'd hang out with other RED people and generally have a good time.
- ryandamm 4y ago
  Yeah this is all accurate... there is a lot of marketing at that company, which is unsurprising given that it was founded by Jim Jannard, who made his money selling consumer fashion goods at Oakley.
- formerly_proven 4y ago
  Don't forget about "REDmags", which are bog-standard off-the-shelf mSATA-SSDs sold at a markup so high it would make Apple execs blush.
bdowling 4y ago
> if any claim gets invalidated, the rest that rely on it are useless. This misunderstanding came up in another thread. If a dependent claim is invalidated, then it invalidates the claims it depends from, but not the other way around. For example, consider the following claims: 1. A method comprising steps A, B, and C. 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising step D. If the prior art only teaches claim 1, then claim 2 could still be valid if the addition of step D is non-obvious over the prior art. If the prior art teaches claim 2, however, then claim 1 is also invalid.

wmf 4y ago

There's a conversation to be had about how much money Red is making from selling luxury goods to amateurs but this thread probably isn't the best place.

Teever 4y ago

> Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? Really? I think you know like everyone else here what consumer means in this context, it's not literally about consuming food, or the disease known as consumption, and that entities that aren't individual consumers in the nightly news sense of the word are called 'consumers' as well. In this instance semantics isn't insightful.

zeusk 4y ago

Because anti-competition is anti-consumer. isn't the whole basis of capitalism that capital drives competition which drives innovation and consumerism?

zamalek 4y ago

> Red isn't a consumer company. How are they anti-consumer? Everything is consumer these days. CNC machines, milling machines, soldering stations, tablesaws, planers, and, yes, high-end cinematic cameras. You're no longer talking about Hollywood and maybe 4 or 5 other big studios leveraging this stuff. Marques Brownlee, Linus Tech Tips, Corridor, and tons of other Youtubers (and I'm sure many more from other platforms) eat these things like candy. If you or I wanted to get into this stuff, we reasonably could with a little financial discipline (and maybe bargaining with our significant other :D). They are unimaginably vulnerable to someone coming along with a platform that accepts any, say, NVME, with some form of "works best with" certification system. That way, if your risk is low ( enthused hobbyist) go with your MLC dumpster diving special, if your risk is high then go with OEM, certified, or better (because there is better storage than what Red offers). Keep in mind that Red have supplanted a stupidly broken industry with a vastly less broken industry, but on the absolute scale they are still pretty fucking stupid. They are living on the time it takes for someone to realize that, given a huge amount of R&D into a sensor (because Red is likely the leading sensor), a more capitalist/competitive approach exists.

detaro 4y ago
> Marques Brownlee, Linus Tech Tips, Corridor, are not consumers but media businesses.
- voidwtf 4y ago
  When did the consumer stop being the ones who consume the product? I’m sure many farmers would consider John Deere’s practices regarding DIY repairs, anti-consumer, as they are the consumers. Any person who might reasonable be considered an end-user of a product, or might buy a type of product might be considered a consumer of that type of product. Anti-consumerism and protectionism do not even require that you be a customer of the company in question, some practices extend beyond the product itself when the company seeks to stifle competition.
- zamalek 4y ago
  That line between "business" and "consumer" is becoming increasingly indistinct. This is the very nature of "influencers." We have every-day-joes/janes setting up multi-thousand dollar machines in their own (or rented) garage for their own, or followers', enjoyment. > are not consumers but media businesses. This idea of yours is extremely out of touch with reality, just like Red are. Those "media businesses" would be nowhere without an engaged audience. The modern audience are participators, not watchers. Commodity 3D printers have succeeded for a reason. People aren't as one-dimensional as they used to be. They take their interests to an extreme degree. It might take a videography/cinematography enthusiast 2 years to save up for a Red, but they will.
  - jrockway 4y ago
    Influencers are businesses, plain and simple. They buy the camera to make a profit. Compare this to someone like me, who also owns expensive cameras, but I have them to take pictures and show my friends. I plan to make $0 from this endeavor. I'm a consumer, not a business.
    - zamalek 4y ago

KaiserPro 4y ago

RED have some very nice people. However, the product was/is okay-ishm but the fan boys are utterly toxic pricks. the charged for everything, made special names for all sorts, and had tesla levels of bullshit when it came to deadlines and capabilities. For example, the "RED ray" laser projector, which supposedly was a 4k native laser based projector, except that it wasn't, never ran at 4k during NAB and if I recall correctly at some point was replaced by a barco. (https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/126579-red-ray-4k-cinema-laser-projector-on-display-at-nab-show-2012 https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/126579-red-ray-4k-ci...) They made "redrockets" that were supposedly super high tech decoding cards, but were in reality rebadged from another company. They were extra ordinarily fragile (I personally accidentally killed 3 in just one event) and fucking expensive (£4k each) It was me, apparently that was the problem, not the design. In the same event I replaced graphics cards, a boat load of Fusion IoDrives, none of them died. So yes, they were anti-consumer to a certain extent. However if they liked you, they'd invite you to the ranch, you'd hang out with other RED people and generally have a good time.

ryandamm 4y ago
Yeah this is all accurate... there is a lot of marketing at that company, which is unsurprising given that it was founded by Jim Jannard, who made his money selling consumer fashion goods at Oakley.
formerly_proven 4y ago
Don't forget about "REDmags", which are bog-standard off-the-shelf mSATA-SSDs sold at a markup so high it would make Apple execs blush.

bdowling 4y ago

> if any claim gets invalidated, the rest that rely on it are useless. This misunderstanding came up in another thread. If a dependent claim is invalidated, then it invalidates the claims it depends from, but not the other way around. For example, consider the following claims: 1. A method comprising steps A, B, and C. 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising step D. If the prior art only teaches claim 1, then claim 2 could still be valid if the addition of step D is non-obvious over the prior art. If the prior art teaches claim 2, however, then claim 1 is also invalid.