Slashdot Log In
PS2 Controller Suit Goes Badly For Sony
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Mar 14, 2006 02:12 PM
from the rumbles-from-the-courtroom dept.
from the rumbles-from-the-courtroom dept.
Immersion Corp, which owns the patent on 'rumble' technology, has won another round in its suit against Sony. Sony's 'dualshock' controller has used rumble technology for years, and in 2005 a judge awarded $82 Million to the patent-holder in payment. From the article: "Sony's defence was the alleged nondisclosure of some of the inventions of key employee Craig Thorner. who has been a consultant both for Immersion and subsequently for Sony. But, according to the report, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken was unhappy with Thorner's testimony supporting Sony, given that he had also been paid by Sony, and so dismissed this line of defence."
Related Stories
[+]
Nintendo Loses Controller Patent Lawsuit 324 comments
kryogen1x alerts us to coverage at 1up indicating that Nintendo controller may soon become scarce — Nintendo lost in court to Anascape over analog sticks in their Wii and GameCube controllers.This isn't the first time the big manufacturers have been targeted in lawsuits involving features in their controllers. From the article: "The lawsuit concerns the analog sticks in the Classic Controller and GameCube controllers, which Texas-based Anascape Ltd. claims to hold a patent on that Nintendo violated. The court has ruled in favor of Anascape, and US District Judge Ron Clark has rejected Nintendo's request for a new trial. As a result, Clark said he will put a ban on the sale of the controllers (which includes sales of GameCube systems) starting tomorrow, July 23, unless Nintendo posts a bond or puts royalties into an escrow account."
This discussion has been archived.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.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
This is just ridiculous (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This is just ridiculous (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is just ridiculous (Score:3, Informative)
But seriously, vibrators have been used for years in mining, as well as fruit picking...
http://www.clevelandvibrator.com/ [clevelandvibrator.com] (Yes, it is suitable for work- it is a company that has, since 1923, made industrial vibrators)
Re:This is just ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
NB I dont know exactly waht the patent says, the above is simply an example as to how a patent can be applied to a new usage from old techniques.
Parent
contrary to slashdot likes to group think (Score:2)
How these particular products vibrates is the patent.
There has yet to be any prior art found on this implementation, and several controller makers have tried.
Re:This is just ridiculous (Score:2, Interesting)
For the simple reason that a cell phone or a pager uses the vibration feature as a form of display, not interaction. The patent covers force feedback, not simple vibration. This is why vibrators and pagers aren't covered in the patent. Neither of which vibrate because you're controlling an entity within a video game.
You see, patents are typically pretty darn specific. Wanna
Re:This is just ridiculous - not really (Score:5, Informative)
I dont think Newton had a video game system or a force-feedback controller. The scope of a patent is determined by its claims, not based on what a slashdot summary says. The claims of this patent are limited to a force-feedback controller
Sony could have licensed this patent for a few dollars several years ago (like everyone else did), but instead they relied on a frivolous legal theory (inequitable conduct) to invalidate the patent. Despite attempts by numerous big companies to invalidate this patent based on prior art, no one has ever located any meaningful prior art. The only issue in Sony's case was inequitable conduct (lying to the patent office), and the only evidence Sony presented was testimony from an "expert" they paid.
Parent
Re:This is just ridiculous - not really (Score:2)
Re:This is just ridiculous - not really (Score:2)
Sorry, but since when was a patent's validity determined soley by the existence of prior art? Non-obvious is also a requirement.
Sony don't have a "force feed-back" system as I understand it - think the steering wheel controller in the force-feedback steering wheel in Hard Drivin' in the arcades that made it hard to stear if you went of the road - what Sony have is a cont
Re:This is just ridiculous (Score:2)
Nintendo has a rumbling implementation as well, yet they never got sued. Only a part of it was that Immersion got their patent a year or so after Nintendo made their implementation.. the other piece is that Nintendo's works much differently than what Immersion patented.
Sony (and Microsoft) however, ripped off Immersion's implementation. Microsoft knew they had no case, so settled. Sony thought they did, and put them where they are
Prior Art (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Prior Art (Score:2)
PS2 Controller Suit... (Score:5, Funny)
Am I the only one who read this and instantly imagined this jump-suit that you'd wear that could maybe read your arm and leg positions to put you directly control your PS2?
Instead we get details of some bogus lawsuit about bogus stuff that we really don't care about.
Whatever happened to cool stuff?
Re:PS2 Controller Suit... (Score:4, Funny)
(If you have heard of it, then you still know why.)
Parent
Re:PS2 Controller Suit... (Score:2)
Re:PS2 Controller Suit... (Score:2)
Nintendo (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Nintendo (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Nintendo (Score:2)
So ... we should run out and try to patent the three weight configuration now? Jump the gun and go straight for four? Is the single-weight version already patented?
Can I patent a new XZylophone which is just like a Xylophone but has
Re:Nintendo (Score:4, Interesting)
That's why when you write a patent, you try to make its claims as broad as possible (e.g., "...for configurations of 3 or more razor blades," or in the context of this article, "...for configurations of 2 or more unbalanced weights driven by electric motors."), and when you're trying to work around someone else's patent, you find all the loopholes and exploit them (e.g., "Oh, look, they didn't cover the case for a single unbalanced weight!").
I used to work for a material scientist who was adept at both activities. He was very good at finding corner cases where other people's patents didn't apply, and then he'd file a patent on the corner case as an improvement to the original patent he was working around. Current patent law allows you to patent improvements to someone else's patented invention or process. (Traditionally, "process" means manufacturing process, although business process patents now seem to be allowed.)
My boss was also good at making his own patents nice and broad to insure that his competitors would violate his IP. He had this fabulous patent on a method for growing a crystalline probe that would be formed on the end of a fiber optic cable. The probe had a face that was at a specific angle with respect to the long axis of the crystal, which he calculated to be the optimal angle for this face, but his patent was written to allow for a range of angles. Sure enough, some company that was using this technology to probe oil wells violated my boss' patent, and of course he went after them to defend his IP. The competitor's product, IIRC, didn't use the optimal angle for the crystal face, but it didn't matter, as they still were within the claims of the patent.
Of course, there are some modifications which are materially insignificant -- like how many legs your apparatus has to stand off the ground -- but most patent authors these days like to leave nothing to chance.
Parent
Re:Nintendo (Score:2)
That would be cool for the new Revolution controllers.
Re:You have got to be kidding me (Score:2)
Re:Nintendo (Score:2, Insightful)
Nintendo escaped because the Rumble Pak wasn't actually built into the controller. (Same goes for the Dreamcast.) Now you know why that functionality wasn't simply built in.
Re:Nintendo (Score:2)
Could this.. (Score:5, Interesting)
This doesn't by any means overshadow the other hardware-related, possible causes for the delays, but might this be a contributing factor no one has mentioned previously?
-NIs
Re:Could this.. (Score:2)
Re:Could this.. (Score:2)
I wonder how long ago.... (Score:2)
In perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
We're talking about 1.37% of revenue:
FTA
In the last ruling against Sony, made in early 2005, Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court levied an $82 million award to Immersion Corp., or 1.37% of Sony's sales of PlayStations and PlayStation-related paraphernalia. The $82 million is less than the $299 million originally sought by Immersion Corp., but the court ruled that Sony's infringement of the vibration patents was not willful and therefore not deserving of the full penalties.
Re:In perspective (Score:2)
Bad Year (Score:5, Insightful)
Format Wars
Xbox 360 popularity
Rootkitting CD's
PS3 delays
Ipod (yes this is bad for Sony)
Lawsuits from vendors
All this bad publicity surely can't be doing the company any good. At this point in time, the CEO would be sacked at most companies i am aware of, but it's not happening here. you have to wonder if the morale within the company is any good also. I hope their lawyers get paid well.
They Still Have Japan Cornerd (Score:3, Informative)
Here's a sample of XBox360 sale data in japan
http://www.craxtion.com/content/view/133/2/ [craxtion.com]
Even the launch was horrid:
http://news.com.com/Study+Xbox+360+sales+start+slo w+in+Japan/2100-1043_3 [com.com]
Re:They Still Have Japan Cornerd (Score:3, Informative)
Wow... Sony lost twice! (Score:4, Funny)
I guess you could call that a double blow.
Or maybe even a dual shock! LOL!! :)
more prior art? (Score:5, Funny)
I had a vibraiting game controller in the late eighties. It was called a pager.
See, I'd give my secret code to some fly hunny; then it'd rumble right before I was about to score!
They even called me a player.
I think the language is similar enough to claim prior art. :)
(FYI for anyone else thinking about picking up this game: Make sure to use a shield in the final encounter or you might play out your days with a permanent chance-on-pee to self inflict fire damage.)
And Sony just doesn't have the brains to simply... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:3, Funny)
I think two words aught to help you: "root" and "kit". Companies like Immersion arn't exactly nice, but Sony is worse.
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:2)
And rootkits may be evil, but at the root of the rootkit problem are things like the DMCA and software and business process patents, and in this case Sony - as evil as they may be - may indeed be a victim.
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:5, Funny)
You shouldn't think for yourself. From now on, either repost what I post, or just look for my posts and reply with "MOD PARENT UP!".
Seriously though, this company isn't *totally* unknown. They designed the crap that goes in Logitech's force feedback stuff. I have a mouse with their stuff in it, and it actually seems fairly clever. It's like you can "feel" the stuff on your screen. It's a little noisy though.
Parent
MOD PARENT UP!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Yet another brainwashed /.er (Score:2)
You must be on Apple's side, insensitive clod!
Re:Wow, this one was tough! (Score:3, Informative)
Just a quick caveat, in the gaming industry only Microsoft licences the patient, as Nintendo independently developed their own rumble technology that is significantly different.
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Sleazbags (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Sleazbags (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:prior art (Score:2)
The technical mechanism for creating the vibration is what is patented.
No prior art has been found for this device. If I come up with a new way to make the controller vibrate, then I could patent that.
That like say a tire company can't patent it's tire technology because there is prior art on the wheel.
Re:Baa! (Score:3, Insightful)