Nintendo hit with Patent Lawsuit over wiimote

"A trial by jury has been demanded as well."

Expect this to be settle out of court. Nintendo is not going to want to have the average Jurist making this decision. They will have a hard time telling the technical difference I'm willing to bet.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Shouldnt they have waited for a larger scale Nintendo success before hitting them with something like this?[/QUOTE]

No, they can't do that. They must act when they find out about the infringment if I remember correctly. If you wait its bascially like allowing them to use it.
 
The patent also reads, “This invention relates to a trigger operated electronic device. In particular, it concerns a mouse for operating a cursor in a computer system.”
Click to expand...

The last time I checked my Wii wasn't a computer unless it got a huge update via Wii Connect 24.

There does seem to be a significant difference between Interlink’s patent and Nintendo’s design, however. Whereas Nintendo’s controller moves an on-screen cursor by moving the actual input device in 3D, Interlink’s patent describes a pointing mechanism that centers around a touch-sensitive pad and buttons, not the movement of the entire unit (“The multiple control elements are responsive to finger pressure to operate switch elements…”).

Still, the suit primarily takes issue with the trigger element that is shared between the two designs.
Click to expand...

It has a trigger so its the same thing?

Interlink said that because of the alleged infringement, it has suffered damages including loss of royalties and reduced sales and profits. The company is seeking a restraining order against the sale of Nintendo’s controller as well as three times the assessed damages including interest. Reimbursement of legal fees is also being pursued.
Click to expand...

What vide game system does interlink make?

Nintendo was never sued by immersion because Nintendo uses their own tech. Seems like a bunch of crap. They are just trying to cash in.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']No, they can't do that. They must act when they find out about the infringment if I remember correctly. If you wait its bascially like allowing them to use it.[/QUOTE]

Right, if you fail to defend your patent/trademark... you then essentially lose it.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']A video games system is a computer.[/QUOTE]

Oh ok I need to burn a cd...oh wait my Wii doesn't do that.
 
Nothing will come of this lawsuit. It will get some press coverage and then disappear from memory.
 
[quote name='jkam']Oh ok I need to burn a cd...oh wait my Wii doesn't do that.[/QUOTE]

So you define something as being a computer by having the ability to burn a CD? I guess all computers that came out before the compact disc technology were not real computers.
 
man talk about karma first they sue sony over the whole rumble feature and now they get sued for stealing the wiimote tech.
 
No way this thing is going to float. The device designs are too different. They claim to have lost profits due to Nintendo's infringement.. hell, I was recently shopping for a mouse for a HTPC, and I wish something of Interlink's supposed patent did exist. Even finding a remote-like mouse can be a pain in the ass, and they're usually expensive as hell.
 
[quote name='Skylander7']No way this thing is going to float. The device designs are too different. They claim to have lost profits due to Nintendo's infringement.. [/QUOTE]

Profits come from having to pay royalty fees from using the technology if Nintendo actually did use some of their patented tech.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']So you define something as being a computer by having the ability to burn a CD? I guess all computers that came out before the compact disc technology were not real computers.[/QUOTE]

It was an example. The whole point is how on earth is interlink losing sales from the Wii? If you look on their website they make confrence room keyboards not video game systems.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']Profits come from having to pay royalty fees from using the technology if Nintendo actually did use some of their patented tech.[/QUOTE]

That's fine and all but they site reduced sales and profits in addition to their royalty fees. Reduced sales of what? Confrence room keyboards? It reeks of bullshit.
 
Meh. Companies get hit with lawsuits all the time. I don't think this will hurt Nintendo in the long run. And I don't think it will go as far as taking the trigger out of the Wii-mote or something like that. There's triggers on lots of controllers. I'd like some specifics on what it is exactly about the trigger or the technology in general that blanketly infringes on their patent.

edit: lolz apossum
 
[quote name='lokizz']man talk about karma first they sue sony over the whole rumble feature and now they get sued for stealing the wiimote tech.[/QUOTE]

Nintendo didnt sue Sony? Immersion did... what the hell are you talking about?
 
[quote name='jkam']Oh ok I need to burn a cd...oh wait my Wii doesn't do that.[/quote]

Nor do some computers.
 
[quote name='Tybee']I would be astonished if this case isn't thrown out by a judge. Kotaku agrees. It's a very flimsy suit.[/QUOTE]


The last thing I want is something that makes it even harder for me to find a wii than it is now, but of course Kotaku agrees. :D I wasnt aware that Kotaku was so familiar with the mechanics that are used in the wiimote and the stuff that Interlink uses to throw the case out so fast.
 
[quote name='MrNEWZ']Right, if you fail to defend your patent/trademark... you then essentially lose it.[/quote]
Tell that to Immersion.
 
after today, 10 times as many people have heard of 'Interlink Electronics'. Im sure their website traffic is thru the roof.

mission 'cheap publicity' accomplished.
 
Sure the Wiimote can be used on a PC, but in reality what company would allow your workers to do a presentation with the Wiimote, you would look like a total ass. This is such BS and if Nintendo lost this case, it just goes to show you that people only care about money.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']A video games system is a computer. Sony said so.[/QUOTE]

Nintendo is DEWWWWWWWWWWWWMED.
 
This is a stupid discussion as any person can see there has been no damage and the lawsuit is pointless.
but anyway the lemming effect...I dont consider a gaming console a computer in that the wii does not have a hard drive(flash memory is not a hard drive), you cannot load a operating system onto the wii as far as I know, it is also not meant for modifying raw data you cannot load up dos and program something(hacker may beg to differ idk)

after thinking about it i guess they gotta sue the makers of universal remotes too, yes you are correct on the definition.....good for you.....but it is clear that this is a pathetic try for money
 
[quote name='MarkMark']This is a stupid discussion as any person can see there has been no damage and the lawsuit is pointless.
but anyway the lemming effect...I dont consider a gaming console a computer in that the wii does not have a hard drive(flash memory is not a hard drive), you cannot load a operating system onto the wii as far as I know, it is also not meant for modifying raw data you cannot load up dos and program something(hacker may beg to differ idk)[/quote]The Wii is a computer. A computer with a very specific purpose, but a computer just the same.

To call it a personal computer, in the connotations that ally that term to the "IBM Clone" era of x86 chips, Windows, DOS, etc. (of course, Apple's moves lately out date most of that ;) ) would be a misnomer.
 
again technically correct but again any person with a half brain will see through this

::back to the actual point of the thread:: the pointer that is patented was meant for business presentations but thet are claiming loss of sales? wtf?
 
All opinions of functionality aside, it is considered a computer by both the Japanese government and the US governement, for the purposes of import/export law and excise regulation.
 
This all started with Nintendo against Sony Rumble device/dual Shock. If they would have just left Sony alone then non of this would have ever occur. Making patients on the idea of

Shaking controllers, Triggers, wireless technology, and even color is dumb.

It is like Adobe using it's sRBG after somebody starts selling a program that does the same job. Also it is the same where Dolby makes a patient on Suround sound.
 
For those of you old enough to remember, back in the 80's Atari bought the exclusive rights for Tetris. Then the big N looked more closely at the agreement and noticed it was for "computer." Nintendo argued that the NES was a video game system and not a computer, thus Nintedno got the exclusive video game contract and Atari had to pull its copies of tetris off the shelves.
precedent.
 
[quote name='RegalSin2020']This all started with Nintendo against Sony Rumble device/dual Shock. If they would have just left Sony alone then non of this would have ever occur. Making patients on the idea of Shaking controllers,

Triggers, wireless technology, and even color is dumb.[/QUOTE]

Again, it isn't Nintendo who sued Sony. It's Immersion. Man you'd think that this being mentioned 20 times in the thread would.... oh wait. It's a Regal Sin post. Carry on.

Anywho, settled out of court. There's no chance in hell Nintendo let's this go to trial even if they think they can win. I think Nintendo could potentially win the suit unless the Immersion remote has the exact same gyroscope technology in the remote that Nintendo does. That's probably the only place where they could make a case. Otherwise, the devices are too different.
 
[quote name='nazrad']For those of you old enough to remember, back in the 80's Atari bought the exclusive rights for Tetris. Then the big N looked more closely at the agreement and noticed it was for "computer." Nintendo argued that the NES was a video game system and not a computer, thus Nintedno got the exclusive video game contract and Atari had to pull its copies of tetris off the shelves.
precedent.[/QUOTE]

Case law, actually. Nintendo has the bestest lawyers.
 
[quote name='nazrad']For those of you old enough to remember, back in the 80's Atari bought the exclusive rights for Tetris. Then the big N looked more closely at the agreement and noticed it was for "computer." Nintendo argued that the NES was a video game system and not a computer, thus Nintedno got the exclusive video game contract and Atari had to pull its copies of tetris off the shelves.
precedent.[/quote]
Correct. And the NES, Master System, SNES, Genesis, Dreamcast, and MAYBE the PS1, I believe were all considered "toys" (under a subsection, thereof) for the purpose of import/export law and excise assessment. That's one of the things Nintendo pointed to, actually, in it's arguments. The Gameboy, DS, PSP, and the like are also categoriezed under toys, even now.

The PS2 started the trend in the other direction. The PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, PS3, Xbox 360, and now the Wii have all been classified as "computers" by both the US government and the Japanese Government for the same purposes (import/export law and excise).

I'm not sure how the case law would stack up now, given the new classification because there's no telling, without retrying a similar case, how much that single piece of evidence swayed the decision. But simply pointing to the case law, and saying the outcome would be the same, isn't true when some of the supporting evidence has changed.

Edit: Also, I'm not sure you're depicting the case law accurately.

atarihq.com/tsr/special/tetrishist.html

"A reminder: Robert Stein's original agreement was only for computer versions of Tetris. Any other rights he gave out weren't his to sell.
Later, Stein makes it to ELORG. Belikov makes him sign an alteration to the original contract defining computers as "PC computers which consist of a processor, monitor, disk drive(s), keyboard and operation system". Stein misses this line defining computers; he later realizes that it was all a big orchestration on Rogers' part to get his rights from Stein. The next day, he is told that, although he can't get the handheld rights at the moment, he can get the arcade-game rights. He signs the contract for them three days later."



That narrow definition of "computer" he was forced to sign probably had more to do with Nintendo winning out than what we're talking about here.
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']Well, it eluded your fanboy in crime jkam so I figured it might be a common occurrence. :D[/QUOTE]

I love that just because I complain about a ridiculous lawsuit I am automatically a fanboy. As much as Sony would make you try and believe that the PS2 is a super computer I'm sure you don't use that or your Wii for the same functions you use your computer for. That is what I was trying to point out with the burning a CD comment. I realize they do share similarities in components but they are used for completely different functions and I don't think anyone is using a PS3 in place of their desktop. Interlink is trying to state that sales of their products are in decline because the Wii exists but on their website I don't see a single gaming related product.
 
[quote name='jkam']I love that just because I complain about a ridiculous lawsuit I am automatically a fanboy. As much as Sony would make you try and believe that the PS2 is a super computer I'm sure you don't use that or your Wii for the same functions you use your computer for. That is what I was trying to point out with the burning a CD comment. I realize they do share similarities in components but they are used for completely different functions and I don't think anyone is using a PS3 in place of their desktop. Interlink is trying to state that sales of their products are in decline because the Wii exists but on their website I don't see a single gaming related product.[/quote]

I used a PS2 with linux as a desktop and ran 5 dreamcasts as servers when I worked for a local ISP.
 
Maybe someone here can explain some patent law to me. Why should Immersion lose this just because they make presentation tools while the Wii is used for video gaming? If you have the patent, they own the technology for all similar uses?

Couldn't they argue that, before the Wii, they could have licensed their patent out for huge fees, and now they would get less?

This could be interesting. If Immersion thinks they have a case, they won't want to settle. Nintendo isn't much for settling out of court. This could go on for quite awhile.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']I used a PS2 with linux as a desktop and ran 5 dreamcasts as servers when I worked for a local ISP.[/QUOTE]

Again I realize that they can be used in that capacity but I would think you using them in that fashion you are among a small minority. I am not trying to be "RIGHT" in this I just think the lawsuit is pretty lame. If it was the XBOX 360 or the PS3 getting the suit it would be equally as lame.
 
[quote name='furyk']Again, it isn't Nintendo who sued Sony. It's Immersion. Man you'd think that this being mentioned 20 times in the thread would.... oh wait. It's a Regal Sin post. [/QUOTE]

Didn't Nintendo sue Sony when they first introduced the dual shock controller because it infringed on their rumble pack patents. Sony had to pull the dual shock controllers off the shelves until they changed how the rumble worked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top