-1

In reference to the patent: WO2016186925A1

CLAIMS
We claim: 1. A method of performing upscaling, the method comprising: parsing an input video; breaking the input video into individual frames; performing upscaling on the individual frames to produce upscaled frames; and stitching the upscaled frames together to produce an upscaled video

Does this mean the entire post production industry will have to pay royalties for standard workflow used for the past 25 years?

The obvious workflow claimed by the so called inventors has been in use for decades. If they are successful in sliding this extremely broad patent application through the review process will they legally be in a position to sue every post production company that continues to upscale video?

Improve this question
3
  • To Clarify, I meant the workflow as claimed in the patent application has been in use for at least 25 years. Going forward it is of great concern for those in the post production industry that a company is attempting to broadly patent the obvious steps involved: 1) Parse Video Frames 2) Upscale frames 3) Stitch or re-encode frames back into a video file. The workflow can't be narrowed any further than this. IMO this is a brazen attempt at patent fraud that could potentially have adverse consequences for a mature industry with long established methodology.
    – user18272
    Commented Jan 11, 2017 at 19:20
  • Prior art reference paulschlessinger.wordpress.com/2014/05 published May 28, 2014 "In fact, you can do this today: extract frames from a raw format video as individual bitmap files, batch process them with Perfect Resize, and then stitch the resulting larger bitmaps into a new, higher-resolution movie."
    – user18272
    Commented Jan 15, 2017 at 6:29
  • Look here: patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2016186925 there is a button called "submit observation". Thats where you can directly send prior art to the WIPO which will send it to the national patent offices if necessary. A paper or other patent would be better though as it is stronger evidence that the process existed before the date of the patent. Note however that they won't answer you, but include your observation in the docket.
    – user18033
    Commented Jan 15, 2017 at 21:05

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
4

Anyone can try to patent everything he wants to without that beeing fraud. After the application comes the examination where claims like these are just getting rejected. If you want to do something against the patent you can however send "prior art", meaning documents proving that these steps were known before the date of the patent to the patent offices.

But in this case, this is just a bad application and I'd bet you anything it's not getting granted. So just relax, there are patent applications for time machines, too. Doesn't mean they get granted.

Improve this answer
2

This is not a patent. It is a patent application. It may never become a patent and even if it does, it is very likely the claims will be greatly narrowed. In any case, whatever has been done prior to the priority date of May 15, 2015 represents prior art and shouldn't be impacted. Given the broadness of the claim, it is worth keeping an eye on this application though.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .