Controller Patent Suit Won Against Sony

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Controller Patent Suit Won Against Sony

Posted by Zonk on Thursday September 23, 2004 @07:45AM from the really-easy-jokes dept.

ivec writes "Immersion Corporation announced that the jury returned a verdict favorable to Immersion in its patent infringement suit against Sony Computer Entertainment. The jury found that Sony infringed all the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,275,213 and 6,424,333 and that those claims were valid. I was surprised how recent these filings were (2000 and 2001). The patents cover 'vibrating devices' such as joysticks."

17 of 38 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

NOT FUNNY by grm_wnr · 2004-09-23 07:48 · Score: 4, Funny

The patents cover 'vibrating devices' such as joysticks.
I refuse to make a joke about that!
1. Re:NOT FUNNY by NanoGator · 2004-09-23 10:06 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  "I refuse to make a joke about that!"
  
  Is that why your teeth are chipped?
  
  --
  "Derp de derp."
n64? by j0nb0y · 2004-09-23 07:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

I guess USPTO patent examiners have never played the N64 with a rumble pack...

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
1. Re:n64? by astrokid · 2004-09-23 07:56 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Source
  Release Date: Jun 01, 1997
  
  Yup, Starfox was released with the rumble pack in 1997. Equipped with the Rumble Pak, the Nintendo 64 Controller becomes a new implement for fun. Not only does the Rumble Pak provide force-feedback in response to the game action, the Controller's analog Control Stick gives you total, precise control of your vehicle, be it a sleek "Arwing" starfighter, an armored "Landmaster" tank, or the deep-diving "Blue-Marine" submersible.
  
  --
  
  Chewie does not get a medal. Come on, George. Can a Wookie get a medal?
2. Re:n64? by rsilvergun · 2004-09-23 08:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Or Operation Wolf. Or any of the dozens of Arcade games from the 80's/90's that had force feed back. How the hell did Sony lose this one? Did they give up hoping this company would charge patent fees to competitors and drive 'em out of business? Seems pretty far fetched, but not as far fetched as Sony droping the ball on this one.
  
  --
  Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
3. Re:n64? by KDR_11k · 2004-09-23 09:02 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The Rumble Pak patent clearly states that it does not include Joysticks (which are what Immersion had patented here) since there's prior art for that. That prior art apparently dates back to an anonymous publication from 1987.
  
  --
  Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
4. Re:n64? by Mekabyte · 2004-09-23 10:25 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Actually, I researched this last night trying to figure out why Sony didn't pull the Rumble Pak as prior art, or why Nintendo has not been sued by Immersion. What I found only left me more confused.
  
  Patent 6,200,253 is Nintendo's Rumble Pak patent, which came out over a year before the Immersion patent. The thing is, it specifically talks about being a detachable device. The GameCube controller's rumble is built in, so it would seem to fall under the Immersion patent. However, maybe they have some sort of private agreement not to sue since Immersion would likely lose their patent.
  
  Patent 6,743,104 is Nintendo's patent for rumble in Game Boy cartridges. This patent references both their Rumble Pak patent as well as the Immersion patent.
  
  It's also interesting to note that something like a dozen Immersion patents specifically reference the Nintendo Rumble Pak, Sony Dual Shock, and sometimes the Sega Jump Pack. Clearly Immersion was well aware of force feedback devices and who was actually using them. I'm not sure what took them so long to try to make a claim on it.
  
  All that said, by the manner in which the Immersion patent in question reads, they pretty much patented every possible alternate configuration of a force feedback/rumble device (different housing, different actuators, different shaped eccentric mass, etc). In being so general however, you'd think that vibrators would be prior art as the first sentence of the patent reads "A man-machine interface which provides tactile feedback to various sensing body parts is disclosed."
Prior Art... by ebrandsberg · 2004-09-23 07:55 · Score: 4, Informative

Information straight from the USPTO:

http://vsmca.tripod.com/sxd.pdf

If these don't count as prior art for vibrating joysticks, I don't know what does.
1. Re:Prior Art... by Fammy2000 · 2004-09-23 08:23 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Prior art doesn't mean prior art anymore. It means "I was the first to file for this patent, even if 10 years later". Or in /. terms, "FP! LOL!"
  
  --
  If I had something intelligent to say, I would have said it.
2. Re:Prior Art... by ebrandsberg · 2004-09-23 09:17 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I've noticed that too. The Patent office is operating under the assumption that all things that are patentable ARE being patented by people, and ignoring the fact that many ideas are NOT being patented. In addition, they are ignoring the fact that a parent should be non-obvious. Proof?
  
  http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns9 99 92178
  
  Not only was this granted, but was granted on appeal.
Or the patents Nintendo has had since 87. by Viewsonic · 2004-09-23 08:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

I dont think they research any of this anymore.
Similar Microsoft lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-23 08:11 · Score: 5, Informative

As it turns out, Microsoft settled a similar lawsuit with Immersion to the tune $26 million, and can license the techology for their own PC and XBox gamepads. Immersion is required to repay some of that amount in the event of a victory in the Sony lawsuit.

Subsequent to the settlement, Microsoft bought a large number of shares in Immersion, and also obtained the rights to sub-license the technology to other parties, including Sony.
This has been used cellphones for . . . by Nomihn0 · 2004-09-23 08:43 · Score: 2, Informative

It's been used before in what I can only describe as haptic sensory feedback in a discreet, pleasure inducing, package. . .

Wired News carried the story
Sony, Microsoft, no Nintendo? by KDR_11k · 2004-09-23 09:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why didn't they sue Nintendo? Were they afraid they'd get sued for infringing an earlier patent by Nintendo that described the same thing?

The "Prior Art" section of the Rumble Pak patent states that "Furthermore, computer games have been known, in which a vibration generating source is provided in a joy-stick, and a vibration is generated at the time of an attack to an own fighter from a player's enemy fighter in a shooting game, for example."

Since Immersion's patent apparently only covers Joysticks it might not conflict with the Rumble Pak Patent, but the Rumble Pak patent clearly states that there has been prior art for joysticks (and that the Rumble Pak has no prior art since it isn't a joystick).

It lists Research disclosure 28373, "Joystick with Tactile Feedback", disclosed anonymously Nov. 1987., perhaps that's our prior art. Can anyone get that document?

--
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Is it just me? by Sylver+Dragon · 2004-09-23 11:30 · Score: 2

A man-machine interface which provides tactile feedback to various sensing body parts is disclosed. The device employs one or more vibrotactile units, where each unit comprises a mass and a mass-moving actuator. As the mass is accelerated by the mass-moving actuator, the entire vibrotactile unit vibrates. Thus, the vibrotactile unit transmits a vibratory stimulus to the sensing body part to which it is affixed.
- From the Patent

Is it just me or does this patent sound a heck of a lot like a vibrator from the abstract?

--
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
Re:Say it ain't so, Dual-Shock... by karstux · 2004-09-23 13:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

It most certainly won't go away. I'm sure Immersion will graciously grant Sony the right to use "their" incredibly inventive "technology" in the Dual-Shock controller as soon as Sony forks over the right amount of cash.

This is also known as 'licensing'.

(ACK on the Dual-Shock being the best design ever, by the way...)

--
Don't whistle while you're pissing.
Isn't the timing in Sony's favour? by TiggsPanther · 2004-09-23 23:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

Not knowing all of the details I can't be sure, but if this is to do with the DualShock controller and vibrational feedback in games then the timing has to be in Sony's favour.

I followed the links to the two patent applications, and the earlier of the two was filed in May 2000. The DualShock controller and games were out before that. I know that Final Fantasy VIII was out in Japan in 1999, and that definitely had feedback during the Summons.

Having said that the article (and other articles linked from it) don't clarify whether it was the DualShock or the DualShock2 that was the culprit. Changes for the PS2 may well have infringed on the claims - but otherwise the controller was out before the claim was made.

It seems to me, then, that either the judges goofed or that there's more to this than is apparent from what the media are telling us.
Either that or you can sue for infringement fo a patent in a device that was built before your claim - which seems kinda daft to me, but wouldn't exactly surprise me anymore.

--
Tiggs
"120 chars should be enough for everyone..."