L&SI: Patent application (20050044617) for 'Methods and apparatus for illumination of liquids', was filed on 3 March 2005, and another, very similar Patent (6,869,204) was granted on 22 March 2005. The abstract of the granted Patent 6,869,204 'Light fixtures for illumination of liquids' appears to be very close to that of the latest application. What is the purpose of applying for the second, very similar patent?
George Mueller, Color Kinetics: "The patent applications referred to here (dated 2005) are actually continuations of previously filed, issued patents and pending applications, dating back as far as 1997. The specific details are clearly listed in the patent applications on the USPTO's website. The purpose of applying for the second similar patent, to respond to your specific question, is to seek further protection to the inventions disclosed in the earlier fundamental patent applications. This is a common practice. Our competitors' suggestions to the contrary (which have been aired in public forums) perpetuate the confusion already surrounding Color Kinetics' patent portfolio and indeed of the basic patenting process."
L&SI: Super Vision tells us it has been making pool or spa lighting of the type apparently covered by your patent, for four years, which would appear to be precede the date your patent was filed. Similarly for Artistic Licence. Does CK now consider itself to have 'ownership' of LED-based colour-changing illumination devices designed to be immersed in liquid? If you do not, can we make it clear to the industry? If you do, how does CK justify it in the light of Super Vision's, and Artistic Licence's, claims to have been doing exactly this since before your patent application was filed?GM: "Here again, the inventions protected by this patent date back to 1997, well beyond our competitors' stated claim dates. Eight years ago, when Color Kinetics filed the original patent application, there were no intelligent LED-based lighting products of this kind available."
GM: "You asked about 'ownership' of LED-based color-changing illumination devices designed to be immersed in liquid. The only way I can really answer that question is by stating Color Kinetics owns broad patent rights in the area of solid-state illumination systems adapted for use in pools, spas, fountains and other such applications. We would like to reiterate that we make our IP available to the broader industry through our OEM and Licensing program, through which numerous industry members have become our partners. We enable our OEM and Licensing partners such as Hayward Pool Products and Balboa Instruments to bring this technology to the pool and spa markets with the highest level of quality.
So, the answer is that all Color Kinetics' rights to technology in this area stem from, and build upon, its original 'core' patent - the one that so many commentators in the lighting industry had a problem with in the first place, and which is being contested by Super Vision Inc and the LED Alliance. The latest news is that the case is unlikely to be heard before Autumn 2005.
Full-court press?
Josh Lerner, a Harvard Business School professor, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal recently saying it is common for companies to try to build "a family of patents" around a product. "If something is strategically important to a company, it's not unusual to see this type of full-court press," said Lerner, referring to the defensive strategy in basketball.
Color Kinetics has a core patent (US Patent 6,016,038 - filed in 1997 and issued in January 2000), which forms the basis of its extensive patent family - now numbering more than 20 U
