Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Microsoft Settles With Immersion Over Haptic Patent

Posted by CowboyNeal on Tue Jul 29, 2003 01:44 AM
from the wheels-greased-with-cash dept.
Microsoft XBox (Games) Entertainment Games
Dolly_Llama writes "Immersion settled their lawsuit against Microsoft over the use of Haptic vibration technology in the XBox controllers. Microsoft paid Immersion $26M to settle and to license Immersion's haptic patents. Immersion has a similar lawsuit still pending with Sony."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Microsoft Sues Immersion Over Rumble Deal 48 comments
Waaay back in 2003, Microsoft settled with Immersion over the rumble technology found in their Xbox game controllers. Now, Microsoft is filing suit against Immersion, claiming that the company has not paid Microsoft 'based on certain business and IP licensing arrangements.' CNet has the release, and links over to a Seattle PI blog entry with some investigative digging by Todd Bishop. "One provision of the Microsoft-Immersion settlement wasn't reported widely at the time, if at all: Microsoft negotiated rights to a payment from Immersion -- a refund, of sorts -- if Immersion settled its case with Sony ... Here's where the new dispute arises: On March 1, nearly four years after the Microsoft settlement, Sony and Immersion announced that they had 'agreed to conclude their patent litigation at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and have entered into a new business agreement to explore the inclusion of Immersion technology in PlayStation format products.' ... while Immersion and Sony have agreed to conclude their patent litigation, they don't use the word 'settlement,' describing it instead as a business agreement."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Microsoft Settles With Immersion Over Haptic Patent 28 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Repetitive Haptic Injury? (Score:4, Funny)

    by quinkin (601839) on Tuesday July 29 2003, @01:48AM (#6557079)
    So at least we know who to blame now for the long term damage caused by vibrating console controls...

    Q.

  • Anybody else remember... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by NanoGator (522640) on Tuesday July 29 2003, @01:50AM (#6557089) Homepage Journal
    ... when Sony was sued by ... uh.. I think it was Atari over vibration inside of controllers? Something about Nintendo not getting sued because the N64's vibration feature was a peripheral and not built into the controller.

    This ring a bell with anybody? Now I'm kinda curious what happened.
    • The Sony vibration is awsome.

      It does slow rotating and fast, it is so much better then any of the other ones I have used (except maybe the GC)
    • As I recall, it was Ninty who were after Sony for that.

      Japan got the Dual Analog Pad, complete with a small motor in one of the grips for the vibration, but Europe and the US the motor was missing (all the control circuitry was still there), and you could take it apart and add your own motor.

      What probably happened was that Ninty got annoyed (they seem to have a number of patents on the subject), Sony removed the motor for a while, and re-introduced it with TWO motors, rather than one probably to get rou

    • That would make sense, as Sega didn't get sued either, and theirs was an extra prehipheral. But then again, Nintendo hasn't gotten sued yet for the Gamecube controller.

  • In case of /.ing (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Microsoft Licenses Immersion's Haptic Patent Portfolio
    Monday July 28, 4:07 pm ET

    Agreements Settle Legal Differences

    Provide Microsoft Broad Licensing Rights to Sense of Touch Patents on Multiple Platforms

    SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 28, 2003--Immersion Corp. (NASDAQ:IMMR - News) today announced a series of agreements with Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT - News), that grant Microsoft licensing rights for Immersion's patent portfolio, which is primarily directed to haptic technologies (the sen
      • I gotta admit, I don't know much about Nintendo's financial situation, but they have stated on record that they've got enough to go at least a couple more rounds in the console wars.

        At any rate, when you see that much Pokemon merchandise flying around, you've got to believe that they're making some sort of money off of it. A backpack with Ash & Pikachu on it probably costs them $0.25 to make, but they can sell them to distributors for at least $5 a pop. Smells like profit to me.

        Sony would do well
    • the reason they didn't sue nintendo is because Immersion force feedback is a bit different from nintendo's simple "rumbles". I have an immersion enabled mouse, and the experience is a bit more subtle than just varying levels of vibration. however, I've used an xbox controller, and I thought it just used a similar device and programming as every other console vibrator, because the effect? feels just like varying levels of vibration.
    • Yay! Flame war time! I live for this!

      Seriously, though, why didn't they sue Nintendo? Did Nintendo license this technology already to avoid such a suit?

      And you'll never play Mario 128 on the PS2 (or PS3). After Sega went to 3rd party, Nintendo publically announced that if they ever got to the point where they couldn't make their own console, they'd get out of the business all together.
    • Ive read in various places that Nintendo has $6 Billion in its war chest.

      They are doing pretty good thanks to the GBA.
    • Never mind that the GameBoy Adavnce is currently outselling the PS2 in the States. Or that they actually make a profit of off each one sold.

  • Yet another strategic cave-in on a patent dispute (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PenguinOpus (556138) on Tuesday July 29 2003, @08:26AM (#6558337)
    Immersion seems more likely to have a strong patent in haptic than SCO has any claims on Linux, but...

    This seems like a strategic settlement by Microsoft to punish Sony. Microsoft paying the settlement to Immersion gives Immersion fuel to feed its lawyers in their continued attack on Sony. You can be sure that when Sony settles or is taken to court the total will be $260M, not $26M.

  • Why didn't MS just buy them? (Score:4, Funny)

    by mhesseltine (541806) on Tuesday July 29 2003, @10:29AM (#6559542) Homepage Journal

    Then, they would be the ones collecting royalties from SONY.

  • Immersion talks about force-feedback on their website, but I think either they or I have understood something wrong.

    To this date I've lived under the impression that force-feedback means "force, to give you feedback", which is to say, when driving car you feel the road, so to say, because the steering wheel (or whatever it's called) turns when the wheels turn. The same thing with aeroplanes. It's a great thing in gaming, since it's much easier to fly a plane if it resists with some force your attempts to

  • You only think it shakes. Great for GTA VC.
  • Maybe by settling first, Microsoft adds some validity/precedent to Immersion's case against Sony, and thus forces Sony to pay a higher patent tax?

    (It should be obvious by now that IANAL. Or ISBOBNTIANAL for short. Yes, Bob *is* NTI-Anal, thanks for asking.)
  • Werent vibrators invented long before Immersions's time?

    Probably not the best example but I'm sure there's plenty of prior art hehe on something like this..

    Howard stern had one that could be activated by whistling..
  • As I understand it, the "make-the-controller-vibrate" technology consists of a small electric motor with an off-centered weight attached. The motor is spun to create varying degrees of vibration. This is worthy of a patent? (I have prior art in my basement, typically during the Spin Cycle).

    When was the "wiggle pen" introduced? The vibrating massager? Various (ahem) adult toys?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.