<You've
actually proved the opposite. If Epson had licensed their screening from RCT,
then there wouldn't have been a lawsuit.
Just because Epson settled a patent lawsuit doesn't
mean that Epson used any of the RCT technology. They may well have developed their
screening technologies completely independently. That's the whole problem with
patents (unlike copyright), you're not protected by independent invention. All
too often it's less risky to pay off a company that claims you infringe their
patents, irrespective of the merits of their claims.>
I’m citing the results of a legal battle by
people who actually heard the case (and didn’t speculate as to who may
have well done this or that). Both HP and Epson have plenty of money to beat
off RCT if the claim is garbage. They are also fully capable of writing code
that doesn’t infringe; that they chose to license the technology and use
it in production machines is how they opted to handle the situation. I never
said it was a bad idea or that BNM was junk technology. My whole point was that
Epson is licensing the RCT technology now, and according to the RCT’s own
press release, that is true. That’s all I ever said. I never gave it a
date, multiple legal conditions, or anything else. End of story.
<> Colorbyte
doesn’t have Epson’s resources either but they manage to do
> it
> better, especially with
the 4000 and its triple-shot dot. In fact
> Colorbyte has exactly
one person responsible for the development of
> these better screens,
color engine, separate B+W pipeline, along with
> all of their other
technologies. I think it is fair to say he is
> probably a talented
person.
I think this is often the case. I was certainly the
sole person responsible for developing the screens, color engine, profiling
engine etc. etc. that is used for the Colorbus Cyclone (NT) product line.>
Hey, you were the one that
said “It's certainly not easy to get screening patterns better than what
Epson manages, since they have had a lot of time and opportunity to figure
their own device out. The handling multiple dot sizes is a bit of a trick.”
My first interpretation of
that comment was “Epson has the staff, the money, and the information that
no small RIP vendor is going to have”. I was citing Colorbyte as an
example of one person that manages to do it better than all of Epson (which we
can assume by your statement uses more than one programmer and has access to
all the information they need). You might be on the same level as the Colorbyte
developer (I’ve never seen Cyclone), that’s great, I was trying to
give a real example since you made mention that it wasn’t so easy.
Cris Daniels