Canon Tops Among Japanese Companies in U.S. Patent Rankings for Eleven Years Running

[Canon Rumors]

<strong>TOKYO, January 14, 2016</strong>—Canon Inc. again ranked first among Japanese companies and third overall for the number of U.S. patents awarded in 2015, according to the latest ranking of preliminary patent results issued by IFI CLAIMS Patent Services on January 13, 2016.</p>
<p>Canon actively promotes the globalization of its business and places great value on obtaining patents overseas, carefully adhering to a patent-filing strategy that pursues patents in essential countries and regions while taking into consideration the business strategies and technology and product trends unique to each location. Among these, the United States, with its many high-tech companies and large market scale, represents a particularly important region in terms of business expansion and technology alliances.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p><strong>Canon U.S. patent rankings among Japanese companies 2005–2015</strong></p>
<table class="noline" width="600">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th class="w25">Year</th>
<th class="w25">Ranking*</th>
<th class="w25">No. of patents</th>
<th class="w25"></th>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2015</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>4,134</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2014</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>4,055</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2013</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>3,820</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2012</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>3,173</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2011</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>2,818</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2010</td>
<td>1st (4th)</td>
<td>2,551</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2009</td>
<td>1st (4th)</td>
<td>2,200</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2008</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>2,107</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2007</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>1,983</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2006</td>
<td>1st (3rd)</td>
<td>2,366</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>2005</td>
<td>1st (2nd)</td>
<td>1,829</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table class="noline">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="top" width="30">*</th>
<td>Number in parenthesis represents Canon’s ranking among all companies</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="top">Note:</th>
<td>Number of patents for 2015 based on preliminary figures released by IFI CLAIMS Patent Services. Figures for 2005 to 2014 tabulated by Canon based on information issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Canon prizes its corporate DNA of placing a high priority on technology. And with regard to research and development results, the Company actively promotes the acquisition of patent rights in accordance with the management direction of the Canon Group and technology trends while conducting thorough pre-application searches to raise the quality of applications. Through close cooperation between Canon’s technology and intellectual property divisions, the Company aims to improve its technological capabilities while further enhancing its intellectual property rights.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[Loswr]

Anyone who knows anything about economics knows protectionism eventually comes back to haunt you. It might take a few years, but the pendulum eventually swings the other way.

Anyone who knows anything about economics understands the difference between market size and market share.

The dSLR market has experienced substantial contraction, but Canon has remained the market leader. In fact, for 2014 Canon gained market share (up to 43.3% for the year), whereas Nikon lost some ground (down to 32.1% for the year). Last quarter Canon's imaging sales dropped as you point out, but Nikon's dropped more. Sony, in spite of their 'working with Zeiss', remains a minor player in the ILC market (13%, and since Sony is the #3 Japanese company in terms of patents, I guess they're going to suffer a dire fate, too), and Leica isn't even a blip in terms of market share.

As for your argument that 'shutting yourself off from the competition with patents and crawling into the corner in fetus position' comes back to haunt you, why don't you have a look at the list of the top patent awardees and tell us how badly all of them have been hurt by their strong patent activity. You can start with IBM, who has topped the patent award list for 20 years, and explain how that 'protectionism' has come back to haunt their corporate performance over those same 20 years...

 

[Loswr]

tell us how badly all of them have been hurt their strong patent activity. You can start with IBM, who has topped the patent award list for 20 years, and explain how that 'protectionism' has come back to haunt their corporate performance over those same 20 years...

Good example, IBM used to be a leader in lithography research. IMEC, which is a research lab working together with Intel, ASML, Zeiss (and Canon), where anyone who funds the research can get access to their technology, is now the dominant leader in lithography, and IBM has become irrelevant in that field.

Yep, they're totally irrelevant in that field. :

http://www.wsj.com/articles/ibm-reports-advances-in-shrinking-future-chips-1436414814
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/09/technology/ibm-announces-computer-chips-more-powerful-than-any-in-existence.html?_r=1

 

[bdunbar79]

tell us how badly all of them have been hurt their strong patent activity. You can start with IBM, who has topped the patent award list for 20 years, and explain how that 'protectionism' has come back to haunt their corporate performance over those same 20 years...

Good example, IBM used to be a leader in lithography research. IMEC, which is a research lab working together with Intel, Samsung, ASML, Zeiss (and Canon), where anyone who funds the IMEC research can get access to their technology, is now the dominant leader in lithography, and IBM has become irrelevant in that field. IMEC doesn't hord patents, they actually sell the technology, the patent is a commodity instead of a tool used for protectionism.

CMOSIS, which makes the sensors in Leica, is an IMEC spinoff. How's that for an example.

All you really need to do is look at CIPA data. That will quickly demonstrate how wrong you are. Continuing to argue your point really isn't going to fix that either. MILC sales are NOT growing.

 

[Loswr]

IMEC doesn't hord patents, they actually sell the technology, the patent is a commodity instead of a tool used for protectionism.

Canon does the exact opposite, shutting themselves off

Yeah, Canon doesn't share patents, they hoard them.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/microsoft-canon-sign-deal-to-share-patent-licenses-1404309163

By all means, keep digging yourself in deeper, seems to be working well for you so far. :

 

[Nininini]

tell us how badly all of them have been hurt their strong patent activity. You can start with IBM, who has topped the patent award list for 20 years, and explain how that 'protectionism' has come back to haunt their corporate performance over those same 20 years...

Good example, IBM used to be a leader in lithography research. IMEC, which is a research lab working together with Intel, ASML, Zeiss (and Canon), where anyone who funds the research can get access to their technology, is now the dominant leader in lithography, and IBM has become irrelevant in that field.

Yep, they're totally irrelevant in that field. :

http://www.wsj.com/articles/ibm-reports-advances-in-shrinking-future-chips-1436414814
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/09/technology/ibm-announces-computer-chips-more-powerful-than-any-in-existence.html?_r=1

Saying IBM is relevant in the lithography field, is like saying Kodak is relevant in the photography field. The companies making lithography happen are IMEC, ASML, and Zeiss. I work in the business.

Once again, protectionism cuts both ways.

 

[bdunbar79]

tell us how badly all of them have been hurt their strong patent activity. You can start with IBM, who has topped the patent award list for 20 years, and explain how that 'protectionism' has come back to haunt their corporate performance over those same 20 years...

Good example, IBM used to be a leader in lithography research. IMEC, which is a research lab working together with Intel, ASML, Zeiss (and Canon), where anyone who funds the research can get access to their technology, is now the dominant leader in lithography, and IBM has become irrelevant in that field.

Yep, they're totally irrelevant in that field. :

http://www.wsj.com/articles/ibm-reports-advances-in-shrinking-future-chips-1436414814
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/09/technology/ibm-announces-computer-chips-more-powerful-than-any-in-existence.html?_r=1

Saying IBM is relevant in the lithography field, is like saying Kodak is relevant in the photography field. The companies making lithography happen are IMEC, ASML, and Zeiss. I work in the business.

Once again, protectionism cuts both ways.

Right. You keep SAYING that. But what you haven't done is present any FACTS or STATISTICS to demonstrate how this relates to Canon and DSLR's. If MILC isn't growing (and it isn't at all) then I really don't understand your point.

 

[3kramd5]

Once again, protectionism cuts both ways.

It's going to be very interesting to see whether Elon Musk lives to regret opening Tesla's battery patents to the public, now that there are multiple well-financed interests competing in that market.

 

[Loswr]

Right. You keep SAYING that. But what you haven't done is present any FACTS or STATISTICS to demonstrate how this relates to Canon and DSLR's. If MILC isn't growing (and it isn't at all) then I really don't understand your point.

His point is that Canon's unwillingness to outlicense their AF protocols and in-license sensor technology (or outsource sensor production) for their dSLRs will hurt them eventually. It hasn't yet, for 11 years and counting. But it will. Probably starting tomorrow. :

tl;dr: YAPODFC.

 

[hubie]

Nice, but what is it worth if it doesn't translate into better products considering they are behind in sensor technology, especially, and mirrorless?

 

[Jack Douglas]

I read CR for the humour but it also provides great insights in psychology!

I don't sense any doom and gloom in my photographic future.

Jack

 

[bdunbar79]

Nice, but what is it worth if it doesn't translate into better products considering they are behind in sensor technology, especially, and mirrorless?

Who cares? Low ISO DR and MILC aren't affecting the market. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

[coreyhkh]

Shutting yourself off from the competition with patents and crawling into the corner in fetus position, afraid you will actually have to compete, afraid someone might actually have a working AF lens for your camera, is ultimately self-defeating.

Let's see...11 years and counting as a leader in patents granted, and the dSLR market leader for 11 years and counting.

So yeah, what you say is totally logical and Canon clearly doesn't know what they're doing. : :

The only reason Canon is the sales leader is they have had more money for marketing and so forth, stupid people think Canon is awesome even though they are often not.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Well, that definitely makes me really stupid. ;D I love my Canon gear.

Jack

 

[bdunbar79]

Shutting yourself off from the competition with patents and crawling into the corner in fetus position, afraid you will actually have to compete, afraid someone might actually have a working AF lens for your camera, is ultimately self-defeating.

Let's see...11 years and counting as a leader in patents granted, and the dSLR market leader for 11 years and counting.

So yeah, what you say is totally logical and Canon clearly doesn't know what they're doing. : :

The only reason Canon is the sales leader is they have had more money for marketing and so forth, stupid people think Canon is awesome even though they are often not.

The ONLY reason? Just that ONE, ONLY reason?

And, I think Canon is pretty awesome. Does that make me stupid?

Time to move out of the parents' basement.

 

[scottkinfw]

I respectfully disagree.

I would say that in general, patent trolling is bad.

Patents for protecting new intellectual property is absolutely necessary to ensure that creative endeavors are rewarded.

If the product is brought to market, considerations can be made regarding sharing, licensing, etc.

Therefore patenting an intellectual property doesn't have to be a constrictive venture at all, in fact we see many examples of the converse all around us today.

Sek

Protectionism only lasts so long. It isn't good for the consumer (Zeiss not bothering to add AF to Canikon lenses, Sigma lenses not focusing properly, etc). But it isn't in the long term interest of the company either.

Japan is increasingly a protectionist society, but this is only a temporary way to stop competition, it is always self-destructive in the end.

You can actually see it hurting Canon, Sony and Leica are working WITH Zeiss, not AGAINST them. As a result, their cameras have great AF zeiss lenses. Canon has no AF zeiss lenses.

Same with the sensor tech, Leica is working WITH CMOSIS, not AGAINST them, as a result, Leica have good dynamic range, Canon does not.

Shutting yourself off from the competition with patents and crawling into the corner in fetus position, afraid you will actually have to compete, afraid someone might actually have a working AF lens for your camera, is ultimately self-defeating.

 

[scottkinfw]

Stop feeding the trolls with <100 posts please!
I'm "stoopid" too!

And PLEASE, it's the fetal position, not fetus position. (And we are the stupid ones?) Sheesh.

Shutting yourself off from the competition with patents and crawling into the corner in fetus position, afraid you will actually have to compete, afraid someone might actually have a working AF lens for your camera, is ultimately self-defeating.

Let's see...11 years and counting as a leader in patents granted, and the dSLR market leader for 11 years and counting.

So yeah, what you say is totally logical and Canon clearly doesn't know what they're doing. : :

The only reason Canon is the sales leader is they have had more money for marketing and so forth, stupid people think Canon is awesome even though they are often not.

The ONLY reason? Just that ONE, ONLY reason?

And, I think Canon is pretty awesome. Does that make me stupid?

Time to move out of the parents' basement.

 

[rrcphoto]

Protectionism only lasts so long. It isn't good for the consumer (Zeiss not bothering to add AF to Canikon lenses, Sigma lenses not focusing properly, etc). But it isn't in the long term interest of the company either.

what the heck are you smoking?

patents are issued to protect your rights to create and market a product with particular characteristics as defined by the patent.

if canon doesn't patent it, and someone else does even AFTER the fact because of the US patent laws - canon would be libel for damages.

Canon has entered into agreements to share patent porfolios with various companies in the past.

but claiming that patent issuance is nothing more than protectionism is completely not understanding how the world works outside of your mom's basement.

whether canon enters into joint development agreements or shares technology and research is entirely immaterial to the publication and submission of a patent.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Couldn't be stated better and I agree, we really shouldn't respond to ignorant comments but sometimes it's too tempting. Generally, I'm content to let Neuro do it.

Jack

 

[Loswr]

Couldn't be stated better and I agree, we really shouldn't respond to ignorant comments but sometimes it's too tempting. Generally, I'm content to let Neuro do it.

Lol. I'm amused when some internet expert states, "Anyone who knows anything about [whatever subject] knows...," then proceeds to demonstrate that they don't know Jack anything whatsoever about that subject.