Matterport Awarded Patent for Dollhouse Tour6342
Pages:
1
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20180125ptan20180025536.php When did this happen? - Patent filed June 24, 2013 - Additional patent filed June 22, 2012 - Patent Granted Jan 25, 2018 What is Patented - The concept of a 3D Tour containing Orbit Mode (Dollhouse), Floorplan Mode, Walking Mode and Transition Mode (smooth visual transition from one mode to another). --- I'm no lawyer, but I would be EXTREMELY cautious in investing any any product that attempts to do what Matterport does without the company being able to show that they are able to do so without a lawsuit that will end in their product being terminated. I'd also want to know if there was a belief that this patent, filed in 2013, would not be granted. https://patents.justia.com/assignee/matterport-inc |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
Jamie private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Wow. That's huge | ||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jamie I think that the results will be simply that no other system will be able to transition between modes. If GeoCV was my product, for instance, I'd separate the Dollhouse view and make it appear separately, showing where the panos are and being a 3D Mini Map of sorts -- even having a lower quality 3D Model in the corner perhaps and allowing toggling between Dollhouse / Floorplan as a mini map only thing ... click a spot and the viewer would navigate quickly from where they are to where they clicked. I should patent that one. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
Dana Point, CA |
RPOceanic private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Pretty crazy.... not sure how they can be given a patent on accessing views that are and have been a normal, fundamental part of any 3d modeling/animation program for a long time. They were the first to use this in this exact context, but they hardly invented anything new here. | ||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
JC3DCX private msg quote post Address this user | |
| They were clever and forward looking... Now they have the leverage in the market | ||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
 GeoCVCo-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Ha, it has been in our product roadmap for quite some time  , we're just deferring this feature. Unfortunately, no one could patent this since it has already been presented in public space, and not only by us. As for the patent, I'm not sure how it could be granted since as I claimed in one of the previous posts, Google Maps has literally just the same experience, just on the city scale. https://www.wegetaroundnetwork.com/topic/4313/page/1/geocv-is-real-competitor-masterport/ (Post 24) |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko Glad to see you posting here! We're all VERY interested in GeoCV -- but for me and many others, I think we're all concerned how your product looks [amazing ... and] like Matterport and functions like it. I'm sure that for your effort, there are things that you would like to protect so that you are able to protect aspects of your company's identity -- so this is an important topic forom both sides. It has been my understanding - and perhaps I inferred this - that GeoCV had the same idea and that both companies were independently developing the same concept as it made sense. -- Concerning the image above -- I absolutely LOVE what you have shown us here! If Matterport's patent does protect their presentation, then the necessary need to diffentiate your product is giving you a value-added feature. Dare I say that some people may prefer what you are offering? This looks great and I cannot wait to see it live! -- Concerning Patents - Google Maps does not have the same experience on a city scale! That's going to take a very GOOD patent lawyer to prove as a way to undo Matterport's patent. I think that Matterport earned this one as truly, what they came out with is unique. - I don't know that any web based 3D+Pano tour system has a minimap that is both a dollhouse, floorplan mode with panos placed in 3D that can be interacted with. Apply for a patent. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
whereareweat private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Thanks for sharing the patent update, that is great for Matterport. Not to drag up this old thread but the examples from 3dnest, if you haven't seen them recently have improved some what.. http://beyond.3dnest.cn/play/?m=zhq_yhysbgq_23 http://www.3dnest.cn/ <-- use google translate chrome plug in as an fyi old thread from last year. https://www.wegetaroundnetwork.com/topic/4577/page/1/one-matterport-like-company-3dnestcn |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I think that many customers might prefer mini map over full doll house view since they spend most of the time in walk through mode anyway, and it's a good way to show the layout without asking for explicit interaction with the 3D model, which might be inconvenient for "non-digital natives". Plus a smaller version hides the imperfections of the 3D scan. | ||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @whereareweat It's a hack of Showcase v2.11 -- try the konami code (up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, b, a, h). Same tools, Mattertags mentioned. They forked the code and reverse engineered the camera. Shameless Chinese knock-off of Pro-1 camera tech. | ||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Btw, I think this is really illegal  Happily, we have fully proprietary source code for everything from capturing to processing to viewing. |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
whereareweat private msg quote post Address this user | |
| agreed, quality is no where near the same... point was, albeit unclear from my side, policing patents is costly. thanks for the cheat code, never knew that would work in Matterport |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Metroplex360 I've captured a short Google Maps footage for you to support my belief that all major claims in Matterport patent have been implemented in Google Maps long time ago, including: - Transitions between 3D model, panoramas, and 2D mode. - Transitions between panoramas using underlying geometry (would be basically open to many GSV providers using GeoCV, Matterport, or other 3D tours solutions, which provide geometry data). - Navigation (pan) in 3D mode with the fixed height (also present in some pro 3D modeling tools), you can try orbit with Ctrl+Left mouse button (on Windows). Please let me know your thoughts. |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
jfantin private msg quote post Address this user | |
| US Patent Law and its applications are quite different compared to other parts of the world. In general, the US Patent Office tends to grant patents even if there are doubts about their acceptability and let the judiciary system to fix any dispute. The idea is not to compromise innovation and hence, within certain reasonable limits, to grant the patent requested and then let the affected party, if any, to go to court. In other coutries, like in continental Europe and Latin America, heavily based on Roman Law, the examining process is very meticulous and the patenting process is long. This is something that was explained to me by a patents expert a couple of years ago when I applied for a patent in the US. He specifically said:"in the US you could get a patent from the US Patent Office and then lose all your money battling in court defending your rights from companies that consider that their rights have been damaged by your idea or design". There is a chance that this applies to this case, although I cannot be sure. This could be a feast for corporate lawyers (remember, in the US life is not understood without a good lawyer at your side )In the meantime, there is no risk for any product already in the market. There will be legal disputes and it will take years (enough years to see new technologies emerging and replacing competitors, even Matterport, of course) I would be very cautions about the consequences of this news and their effects on Matterport's competitors. It is good news for Matterport in the sense that they have not wasted their money with their patents lawyer (the patent was granted), but it doesn´t mean a lot in the big scheme of things I am sure others will have a very different perspective and a lot of interesting things to comment. I will keep reading this thread. |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYaukbenko I still think that the Google 3D to Street View transition is simulated, not actually doing what GeoCV or Matterport do. Once you are in GSV, you're out of the 3D World. To add another thing -- the definition of 'smooth transition' is up for grabs - but is a cornerstone of Matterport's patent and a cornerstone of how Matterport works and how GeoCV is currently setup. The transition between 3D Satellite view and pano mode is NOT smooth. It looks like the 3D Mesh is used while moving into position, but not as the pano enters. The transition between each pano is NOT smooth either -- it's still just sliding and cross fading -- it's abrupt and simulated. |
||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
jfantin private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko Oh, absolutely @Antonyakubenko, there is room for challenging the patent and that's why I say that this will be a feast for Google's lawyers. Paraphrasing Zuckerberg´s phrase in "The Social Network" movie and applying the concept to this case: "at the moment Google could buy Matterport premises and turn them into their ping-pong room, decorated with a few hundreds of unused black plastic carcasses of unsold Pro 2s" I am joking with this last phrase, of course, but it reflects the fact that in the purely darwinean world of patent´s law in the US, the winner is not the first or who is right, but the richest. |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Metroplex360 It looks similar to me. You see a 3D model (dollhouse or 3D city model), when you jump into panoramas the camera moves to the panorama position and orientation thru the 3D model while changing rendering smoothly to a panorama. I recommend to play around with it a bit more, in particular by using mouse scroll to switch between 3D and walk through (zoom in / zoom out). I think the main thing that makes you feel differently about GSV is that you see the transition between 3D model and panos much better. It happens because GSV uses different source for texturing buildings (aerial usually), so they are not textured from GSV panos. In case of GeoCV and Matterport the same panos are used for both texturing and walk through, thus the transition between 3D scan and panos looks much smoother. Additionally, when you transition from pano to pano in GSV the 3D model is rendered with texture changing from one pano to another. Again, the quality of mesh is much better in case of GeoCV and Matterport, thus the transitions look better. But we should take into account that GSV solves the task on Earth level, while we're solving it on a like house level. Particular implementation and parameters are different between all three solutions, but the underlying mechanics is quite similar imho. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYakubenko Similar, but simulated. I'm calling your use of 'smooth' pretty liberal as GeoCV's 'smooth' transitions are breathtakingly beautiful compared to this I'd be curious to see what Petracco thinks as I still think that Google is using a very limited amount of 3D data in their special effects -- not literally transitioning between elements that are living in a 3D World. And at any rate -- Matterport's patent is on 4 unique modes that interoperate together -- Dollhouse (Orbit), Floorplan, Inside (Walking), and Transition Mode (the ether that all things glide between). Google might have a flat satellite view, but this is an endless sea of satellite imagery -- so I see this as being different. The devil is in the details, but the patent quarrel is more applicable between GeoCV and Matterport. If GeoCV removes (or has to remove) smooth transitions between dollhouse/floorplan and the inside tour, but retains this collected data as a mini map, then I see no potential quarrel there either. If I were @AntonYakubenko, I'd be "on the way to the patent office" to patent your unique floorplan mode in any way you can. I absolute love that feature and hope you continue to innovate on it. |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
 PremiumMember North Palm Beach, FL |
hometakes private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @antonyakubenko Are you ever going to release your camera tech to us? Been waiting a long time to see what you are going to do. Whats the holdup? | ||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @hometakes Sure! I wish I could provide it to everyone interested right now, honestly. The three bottlenecks, which we're currently solving (both hardware and software development takes long time, especially with limited resources): - producing enough hardware (rotators for the phone), which is robust, accurate and reasonably priced for low volumes production - fully automating post-production of the results while delivering high quality - providing wed dashboard for photographers to edit 3D tours data without manual back and forth with us |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
Premium Member North Palm Beach, FL |
hometakes private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Ok! Thanks for the update. I guess good things come to those that wait! Always worth the wait if its to make sure that all is as good as it can get. | ||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
mori private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I can ask my specialists at the European Patent Office about their opinions on this. But as a 3D dollhouse made with 3d laser scanning and photogrammetry is nothing new I am sure that there where already users before Matterport doing this. So the devil is in the detail and in the end always the company wins who has the better lawyers. Totally independent of who´s right or not. | ||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @mori That's not what the patent is for. Be sure to have them review the actual patent that was filed and approved. | ||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?