Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Patents Online Console Gaming
MagicDude writes "Nintendo has patented key console online gaming features. Specifically, it has received patents on things such as player league tables, voice communications and online gaming host services. While the article doesn't address how Nintendo will use these patents, it makes you wonder if this is the first step for Nintendo to become a major player in the online gaming market."
Is this why Microsoft wants to buy Nintendo, I wonder?
My hope is that if enough ridiculous patents are issued (I'm reminded of the guy that patented "swinging on a porch swing sideways" and "swinging on a porch swing sideways while making 'tarzan' sounds") they may revamp how the patent process works.
Oh yeah I also submitted a patent for spinning in an office chair, don't be jealous...
I boycott signatures
Nintendo were always a mean, litigious, predatory outfit, some of whose business practices would make Microsoft blush. They had a near-monopoly in the NES days and they used every trick in the book to maintain it as long as they possibly could.
They focused on world domination, and screwed over everyone and everything in their path. The only reason they're not still what they were is that they screwed over Sony on the SNES CD project and Sony screwed them right back.
Do not expect Nintendo to play nice with a patent like this one. They'll sue everything in sight to ensure online dominance for their next console.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
The patent cited there is for a console with a harddrive, but voice services for games have been around much longer than 1999. I remember playing subspace in 97 with the ability to record and send short clips to other players, and using netmeeting to chat with friends. These days when consoles literally are just desktops, "on a console" is no more innovative than "on the internet".
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Nintendo began as a company making playing card decks, and protecting its brand ferociously. When it went into electronics, making cheap knockoffs was rampant throughout Asia. Their protectionist strategy backfired in getting a library of games to compete with Sony and MS, but Nintendo always has and will continue to feircely protect its intellectual properties.
Dammit people, stop thinking like that. I hear it all the time with regards to Microsoft, IBM, Nintendo, pretty much any huge company that has a patent portfolio.
Yes, you are right they have never used them aggressively, it has always been a "defense" war-chest.
Have you ever heard of an "end game"?
Look at SCO, they never used their supposed ownership of Unix aggressively either right? Ooops, they never did until they became completely irrelevant and and felt the need to do something, ANYTHING to resurrect their failed business.
So what happens when (not if) Nintendo, IBM, Microsoft, et al, being to lose significant marketshare? When (either due to competition, crappy economy, whatever) these companies begin the inevitable fall from grace that every company in history eventually has done? When the stockholders demand profit and actions to be taken to get that profit? It will be fiscially irresponsible (and almost criminal) for the management NOT to use their patent portfolio aggressively to regain profit. If they won't the stockholders will oust them and bring in attack dogs who will.
It is almost inevitable that these patents WILL be used aggressively. It is just a matter of time. Consider it corporate insurance that you will never lose your position in the computer industry.
Or look at it another way, consider it insurance that Microsoft and IBM will never be made irrelevent by Open Source, as soon as it gets too popular, it will be litigated away. If the PS2 and X-Box take away too much of Nintendo's market, they will be ligitated into effectively paying Nintendo (licensing fees) for the market-share they took.
Finkployd
"So tell me, who would you rather hold the patent on these things, Microsoft or Nintendo?"
Honestly? MS. Or MS and Sony. Nintendo has a vested interested in keeping software piracy controlled to the point that they didn't want any games online. Sure, the PR was that "no one wanted online gaming", but come on. Everyone wanted online gaming. The truth is Nintendo wanted to take every possible easy avenue away from pirates (what better way to get ISOs on an Xbox than by the network).
Nintendo doesn't "get it". They haven't gotten it in 20 years. Their controls drive away users and piss off players who'd like to play online.