Audio Video News

Of all the promising new video display technologies, SED is the only one with the misfortune to be tied up in a lawsuit. The latest phase of the case ended last week when the jury said Canon, the defendant, would not have to pay any further damages to Nano-Proprietary, the plaintiff.

Canon had struck a deal with Texas-based Nano to bring the ultra-flat-tube display to market. Along the way, Canon picked up Toshiba as a manufacturing partner. Nano cried foul, alleging violation of their licensing agreement, and continued litigating even after Canon bought out Toshiba's share of their partnership.

Nano will be allowed to keep the $5.5 million already received under the licensing agreement. However, Canon will not have to pay any additional damages because the product never came to market. Canon said it will still appeal the prior judgment that it had violated the license.

And so SED will remain bottled up while similar technologies, such as FED, inch their way toward their market debuts. It's excruciating to think that Toshiba had planned to begin producing 55-inch SEDs as early as this fall!

Even so, the press release from Nano strikes an oddly hopeful and conciliatory note: "We were also pleased that during the trial, Canon confirmed its plans to move forward with its SED TV and continue to believe that the advent of field emission display televisions will be a signal event for Nano-Proprietary. We made a significant gesture to Canon during the course of the trial that we hope will provide a framework of cooperation and negotiation for the future. Nothing about today's verdict changes the fact that we have significant intellectual property that we believe will have to be licensed by anybody, including Canon, that wishes to sell televisions based on electron emissions in the broad geographical areas of the world where our IP is in effect."

The press release from Canon is a bit more terse.