Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo all Sued over Controllers

[bapenguin]

Frivolous law suits....HOOOOOOOOOOO! Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are all being sued (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070110-8588.html) by Fenner Investments over a controller patent they hold.Fenner Investments filed a lawsuit against all three companies last week, alleging that they were in violation of the company's 6,297,751 patent (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=6,297,751.PN.&OS=PN/6,297,751&RS=PN/6,297,751) for a "low-voltage joystick port interface." Does the lawsuit stand a chance?

Fenner has been involved with two similar patent claims against major companies, and appears to have had some success with both of them. In May 2006, Alcatel settled with Fenner, but the bigger case was a 2005 lawsuit against telecom heavyweights Lucent, Nortel, Cisco, Juniper, and others.

The joystick port case concerns a patent filed in 1998 and granted in 2001. While most integrated circuits had previously run at 5V, the inventors believed that newer circuits would run at lower voltages. "Therefore," says the patent filing, "a low-power port is needed to interface the conventional 5 Volt joystick device with a lower-Volt integrated circuit."

So wait. Does this company just make up patents and file them in the hopes that they can some day claim money on them?

[drakkarim]

So wait. Does this company just make up patents and file them in the hopes that they can some day claim money on them?

this has been a business model for many many years.

personally, i hope the 3 squish these fuckers into living in a van, down by the river.

[card930]

Yes.
Yes they do.
They just sit there, and wait for products to come out that MIGHT have a resemblence to their patents, and then they litigate.
(heard about it on gaming steve.)

[NoName]

So wait. Does this company just make up patents and file them in the hopes that they can some day claim money on them?
Yes.

I think some of the gaming companies being sued have previous art concerning their controllers.... this patent wasn't filed till 1998!

[KingGorilla]

There is a need of copyright reform, and this is one of the areas that needs to be addressed. As a statutory idea only, the spirit of the statute of protecting inventors and businessmen from having their ideas ripped off and cloned has turned into this minority of instances where people buy out patents from small people or failing companies and just sit on them filing lawsuits. Immagine that after Acclaim went under they had a patent for a gyroscopic handheld controller, a company buys that patent and sits waiting and then sues Nintendo and Sony over it.

There is a natural safeguard built into US common law that I will address on my show this weekend(Hint fucking HINT!).

[Reznoriam]

I'm personally sick of this. Something needs to be implemented to stop these patent suits. Perhaps something in the way of if the patent isn't implemented by the parent company within a certain period of time the patent becomes void.

[KingGorilla]

I'm personally sick of this. Something needs to be implemented to stop these patent suits. Perhaps something in the way of if the patent isn't implemented by the parent company within a certain period of time the patent becomes void.
There are legitimate ones though, games and tech are built upon garage and at home innovation(apple, Microsoft, etc all started this way with ideas that the big boys were not keen to). I will give you the example of Harmonix. They had their patents filed for the guitar and all that; but it was a long while after that before they got the capital together to make the game and have it published. What would happen if in this interim, say Ubisoft or EA made exactly the same thing independently or worse, from a Harmonix employee wiled away?

[roboninja]

So, following recent history, Sony will come out wit the Sixaxis Plus++ that does not include a low-voltage joystick port.
Seriously, these kind of actions should in themselves be illegal. The patent system in most parts of the world is a complete joke. The only reason it has not changed is, in spite of lawsuits like this, it still protects the interests of large corporations more than the small inventor. The process is such that the individual has little chance to compete.

[Nighthold]

There is a need of copyright reform, and this is one of the areas that needs to be addressed. As a statutory idea only, the spirit of the statute of protecting inventors and businessmen from having their ideas ripped off and cloned has turned into this minority of instances where people buy out patents from small people or failing companies and just sit on them filing lawsuits. Immagine that after Acclaim went under they had a patent for a gyroscopic handheld controller, a company buys that patent and sits waiting and then sues Nintendo and Sony over it.

There is a natural safeguard built into US common law that I will address on my show this weekend(Hint fucking HINT!).

Even though I hate nitpicking, copyright and patent are two different things, though two sides of the same constitutional allowance to the congress (Art 1, sec 8, clause 8). I believe you meant patent reform.

I agree though there needs to be both copyright AND patent reform. We tend to be overprotective of copyrights, E.G. software being transferred onto a CPU could constitute making an unauthorized copy (MAI v. Peak), and over allowing of what we grant patents to.

[Doctor Setebos]

Yes.

I think some of the gaming companies being sued have previous art concerning their controllers.... this patent wasn't filed till 1998!Each of the big three don't just have prior art to prove their case--they each have their own patents on their devices.

[Johan]

Litigation is the American (and Western) way. We love to sue one another. This is not surprising. It is lamentable, but I won't hold my breath for anyone or anything to change this.

[51|RandoM]

So wait. Does this company just make up patents and file them in the hopes that they can some day claim money on them?

Probably not. What they probably do is buy patents like this from other companies, with the sole purpose of filing suits like this.

It is becoming more and more of a big business to do that, and only that.

If you look at their history of wins, you'll probably find lots of out of court settlements. For many companies, it is cheaper in the long run to settle out of court than to fight these suits... even if they would eventually win the court case.

All it takes is an injunction to stop you from selling the related products while the suit drags out to make settling out of court an attractive prospect.

[Paranoia]

Litigation is the American (and Western) way. We love to sue one another. This is not surprising. It is lamentable, but I won't hold my breath for anyone or anything to change this.

Few days ago its the Tigger, now this. Lame-O. :rolleyes:

[thomw]

What an ingenious idea. Thank god it's patented.

[KingGorilla]

Even though I hate nitpicking, copyright and patent are two different things, though two sides of the same constitutional allowance to the congress (Art 1, sec 8, clause 8). I believe you meant patent reform.

I agree though there needs to be both copyright AND patent reform. We tend to be overprotective of copyrights, E.G. software being transferred onto a CPU could constitute making an unauthorized copy (MAI v. Peak), and over allowing of what we grant patents to.
You are absolutely right, and distinct. I was caught on coffee .5 and I am not functional until cup 2.

[BrokenSymmetry]

So now we will get high-voltage controllers. Sounds fun, will give some new options for feedback to the player!

[51|RandoM]

So now we will get high-voltage controllers. Sounds fun, will give some new options for feedback to the player!

Somebody will spill koolaid on their high voltage controller, start a fire, burn their house down and then sue the industry.

...and people wonder why these industries strive to get every percentage point of profit they possibly can from the consumer.

[CrashCart]

Sigh. As long as patents are allowed to be intentionally ambiguous and generic, we'll have these kinds of lawsuits. Seriously, a low voltage joystick interface? This is like someone suing HDMI because they hold a patent on "digital audio and video interfaces." Vague enough to cover a lot of possible future products, but specific enough that they can convince the patent office and be able to sue over it.

[Nighthold]

You are absolutely right, and distinct. I was caught on coffee .5 and I am not functional until cup 2.

Sorry for calling you out on it, its just a common misconception to confuse copyright with trademark with patent. Moreover I have the misfortune of actually having three different intellectual property classes today alone, so it was on the tip of my tongue.

Whatever though, I do agree with your principle assertion: cases like this completely highlight the need for substantial reform.

From a legal theory approach, that we need this kind of reform is due to the fact that there has been a distinct lack of cohension in how congress has approached intellectual property rights. Every time they update the statutes its usually with an ad-hoc patchwork of new definitions or regulations. There is no overt theory or strategy justifying the entire mish-mash. It would be great for a real legislator to get some balls and undertake to rewrite the entire thing into some sort of uniform copyright, trademark, and patent bill.

[KingGorilla]

More importantly, it seems that "reform" in the modern era means knee jerk reaction to intense lobbying from minority parties who just look pissed off for no logical reason(I like the busy body housewife laws on sexual predators and sex offenders). Civil Commitment laws for "sexual predators," the DMCA which inadvertently stripped us of our rights to legitimately use purchased hard media, etc.

[AniAko]

... It would be great for a real legislator to get some balls and undertake to rewrite the entire thing into some sort of uniform copyright, trademark, and patent bill.

Utopian hypotheticals sound so good... Time for you to make your mark in history Nighthold ;) Vote for Nighthold! :)

[Nighthold]

Utopian hypotheticals sound so good... Time for you to make your mark in history Nighthold ;) Vote for Nighthold! :)

Well I am neither seeking nor will I accept the nomination for any office less than absolute dictator for life. Vote at your own discretion.

That being said, its hardly utopian, there have been restatements of other areas of law that have effectively brought them together (contracts, real property, agency, etc etc etc).

[KingGorilla]

Oh God, restatements...I just threw up a bit.

[Nighthold]

Oh God, restatements...I just threw up a bit.

Yeah, I have to hold my nose every day and force myself to study them.

I HATE it.

[AniAko]

Well I am neither seeking nor will I accept the nomination for any office less than absolute dictator for life. Vote at your own discretion.

That being said, its hardly utopian, there have been restatements of other areas of law that have effectively brought them together (contracts, real property, agency, etc etc etc).

Very true, but I would tend to believe IP to be a bigger beast than all of them together? It's the main drive of our economy, everyone is going to want their piece.

[Nighthold]

Very true, but I would tend to believe IP to be a bigger beast than all of them together? It's the main drive of our economy, everyone is going to want their piece.

Good point. Plus, its a slave to changing technology. Even so, some housekeeping seems in order.

[Tempest261]

Wouldn't Microsoft be completely immune to this since Xbox 1 was USB-based, and Xbox 360 is actually USB? They'd have to sue IEEE or something instead... not going to happen.

[MacD]

Bunch of bloody patent trolls.

Still, 's gonna be a short lawsuit: one of the three things a patent should be to be granted is 'non-obvious'...doing the same but with lower voltage is a no brainer to someone who is 'reasonably aquainted in the field', therefore the patent is not only quite an obvious step to take (even two decades back it would have been obvious), but in no way is it 'innovative' (as in nothing new is being done, which is the second qualifier for a patent).

Simple fact of the matter is that this patent should never have been granted...it's just a shame that it's gonna cost N, MS and S money to show that to the courts. Kinda shows exactly why and how the current patent system is broken...the little guy could never afford to defend his/her patent, even if he/she had the money to get one in the first place.

[Thenetcase]

I am going to quickly get a patent on this business model and then whenever I see anyone doing what these people are doing, I'll sue them for demonstrating my business model w/o my exclusive permission!!

SUEAGE FTW!

[AniAko]

I am going to quickly get a patent on this business model and then whenever I see anyone doing what these people are doing, I'll sue them for demonstrating my business model w/o my exclusive permission!!

SUEAGE FTW!


Too late, I'm serving you papers for infrigment on my idea.... ;)

[outontheporch]

could you imagine nintendo, sony and MS combining forces? It would be like 3 Bruce Willis' killing Hans, Hans' brother, and Hans' mother.

[blackzc]

Im gonna sue home depot. They sold me a hammer that they knew i might drop on my toe.

[Sl1pstream]

Wouldn't Microsoft be completely immune to this since Xbox 1 was USB-based, and Xbox 360 is actually USB? They'd have to sue IEEE or something instead... not going to happen.

Even if that was true, the wireless controller isn't a USB controller.