Crimson is suing Nikon for allegedly infringing on its video compression expertise with the Z9’s N-RAW video seize: Digital Images Overview


A brand new lawsuit, filed by representatives for cinema digicam producer RED, accuses Nikon of illegally utilizing its patented knowledge compression expertise in its Nikon Z9 full-frame mirrorless digicam.

In response to the lawsuit, filed within the U.S. District Court docket for the Central District of California, the plaintiff,, LLC (RED), is accusing the defendant, Nikon Company (Nikon), of patent infringement. Particularly, RED is accusing Nikon of knowingly utilizing expertise described in RED’s patents pertaining to ‘extremely compress[ed] video knowledge in a visually lossless method’ in its Nikon’s Z sequence mirrorless cameras, ‘such because the “Nikon Z9 with Firmware 2.0.”’

As we reported again in December 2021, Nikon is licensing intoPIX’s TicoRAW expertise for the 8K/60p N-Uncooked video in its Z9 mirrorless digicam. What’s fascinating is that intoPIX describes its patented TicoRAW expertise as ‘mathematically lossless and visually lossless right down to 1 bit per pixel,’ which is extremely just like how RED describes its expertise.

A screenshot from intoPIX’s web site exhibiting the advantages of its patented TicoRAW expertise.

RED additional alleges Nikon knew about these patented applied sciences and its ‘prior lawsuits involving a number of of the asserted patents.’ Particularly, RED mentions its complaints towards Kinefinity, Nokia and Sony, with Sony going as far as to countersue RED for infringing upon its patents.

In response to RED’s grievance, Nikon’s use of its patented compression expertise is ‘prone to trigger irreparable hurt to RED, which can’t be adequately compensated by cash damages,’ by ‘misplaced gross sales and income, diminished enterprise, and damage to its normal popularity and business standing.’ Regardless of alleging it ‘can’t be adequately compensated by cash damages, RED says it’s ‘entitled to a rise of damages as much as thrice the quantity discovered or assessed at the least as a consequence of Nikon’s willful and deliberate infringement [and] entitled to an award of its attorneys’ charges as a result of Nikon’s infringement presents an distinctive case.’

RED can also be looking for ‘a preliminary and everlasting injunction enjoining Nikon from infringing the claims,’ that means it needs Nikon to cease selling and promoting the merchandise allegedly infringing upon RED’s expertise. What isn’t clear is why RED is suing Nikon as a substitute of intoPIX, contemplating Nikon’s licensing of intoPIX’s TicoRAW expertise was pretty nicely lined in business. Nevertheless, RED does particularly point out that Nikon sells merchandise in the identical channels because it does within the grievance and notes gross sales Nikon’s allegedly infringing merchandise will damage RED’s backside line.

That is purely hypothesis, however it’s doable RED does not really feel as if they’ve a case towards intoPIX, since they’re in numerous markets: digicam {hardware} vs codec licensing, respectively. It is also doable RED is hoping this grievance will end in a settlement with Nikon, who can doubtless afford to come back to a extra substantial monetary settlement in comparison with intoPIX.

Under is the total grievance:

We have now contacted each Nikon and RED for feedback on this matter. As of publishing this text, solely Nikon responded, however stated it was ‘unable to touch upon the matter.’


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here