Only Huge Redmond 'M' is still allowed to supply the technology whereas Huge Nipon 'S' has to lose it's vibration function - at least in current implementation.
Sony Barred From Making Dual Shocks, has to pay $90M
- Thread starter TEXAN
- Start date
zidane1strife
Banned
Ridiculous and pathetic patents.
And people wonder why some like I seek the capability to dismantle the entire legal system at a whim... this is the kinda BS why it's necessary, I refuse to be subject to such.
PS Sorry if it's unfair for all of ye, but everything goes in love and war... and this is certainly WAR(assuming they try some patent mojo on my company someday)
And people wonder why some like I seek the capability to dismantle the entire legal system at a whim... this is the kinda BS why it's necessary, I refuse to be subject to such.
PS Sorry if it's unfair for all of ye, but everything goes in love and war... and this is certainly WAR(assuming they try some patent mojo on my company someday)
To everyone bitching about this, i'd love to see what you would say if you were in Immersion's position. It's only normal that they sued Sony and that they get their money, if Sony has been using their technology for free all these years.
It's very simple really.
It's very simple really.
Potentially, it is business, but defective, illogical, unreasonable business. The patent system is well and truly broken, mostly it seems because patent offices (particularly the US office it seems) are willing to grant patents that obviously don't satisfy all the requirements of what a patent needs. Software patents are the perfect example of the worst case, where companies are patenting technology that has been publicly used for many years.
In this particular case the tech seems valid from what's read, BUT it's quite possible that there's prior art (what's this Teledilonics thing?) in which case the patent shouldn't have been granted or upheld in law.
I don't think anyone's in a position to argue the case here whether Sony are fairly being prosecuted or not, without knowing the background or the court-room antics. But it IS quite possible that Sony are being prosecuted because of legal shenanigans and not as a fair upholding of someone's hard work and developments. It certainly seems to me and awful lot of money for a couple of eccentric weights. that said, 50 cents a controller and lots of 'em...
In this particular case the tech seems valid from what's read, BUT it's quite possible that there's prior art (what's this Teledilonics thing?) in which case the patent shouldn't have been granted or upheld in law.
I don't think anyone's in a position to argue the case here whether Sony are fairly being prosecuted or not, without knowing the background or the court-room antics. But it IS quite possible that Sony are being prosecuted because of legal shenanigans and not as a fair upholding of someone's hard work and developments. It certainly seems to me and awful lot of money for a couple of eccentric weights. that said, 50 cents a controller and lots of 'em...
Yup. I'm all for stopping patent abuse, but this one looks to me like the good guys won and the bad guys (in this particular instance) lost.london-boy said:
Sony should have paid them for the tech like everyone else.
Maybe I'm just reading this wrong, but to me this patent is extremly specific. It describes a controller with built in rumble that uses a signal processor to both read the joystick and start vibrations in response to host requests.
If this predates the original dual shock (which I guess the court believes it does) controller, it seems like a perfectly good patent.
It's not like it was an obvious thing before every controller rumbled annoyingly.
I'm not a big fan of the patent system, but this one doesn't seem like one of the bottom of the barrel ones.
If this predates the original dual shock (which I guess the court believes it does) controller, it seems like a perfectly good patent.
It's not like it was an obvious thing before every controller rumbled annoyingly.
I'm not a big fan of the patent system, but this one doesn't seem like one of the bottom of the barrel ones.
BOOMEXPLODE
Regular
fallguy said:
smiley face=joke, einstein
Whats that have to do with this law suit ? I was spending 30$ on dual shocks when they first came out way before this law suit was even brought up .
Or should I remember that sony is willing to rip me off and other companys to make money when i buy a rumbling piece of plastic from sony for 30$ ?
And to sum this up quite nicely, Sony is a huge company, with many VERY good lawyers, if this case was not totally 100% valid, those lawyers would have slaughtered Immersion. And the fact that the payout is so big only strengthens the point that this is not just a "mistake" or a "farse" on the court's part. Only Bush makes mistakes this big, and bigger.
ERP said:
Specific, but "patently obvious". It uses the same vibrational design that every vibrator held by every woman in the world uses. In 1991, people were building "teledildonics" "controllers" which were essentially "force-feedback" dildos that reacted to a "host" computer.
Perhaps you mean they should have a patent on the whole idea of rumbling controllers and not this specific implementation, because their implementation lacks any innovation. It is really the idea itself: vibrating controller which is being protected and their patent makes more claims than just their specific implementation of the vibrator piece.
I object to this patent because Immersion didn't invent it. Back in the early 90s, I frequently hung out with VR researchers, and they had already built prototype haptic gloves which vibrate. People just thought the idea too obvious and too much trouble to bother patenting.
Similar threads
- Locked