PS2 Controller Suit Goes Badly For Sony

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."

Comments

This is just ridiculous

[ZakuSage]

We're talking about a fundamental principal discovered hundreds of years ago by Newton. How the hell was something as simple as a non-symmetric rotating mass patented in the first place?

Re:This is just ridiculous

[Richard_at_work]

Because unlike the majority thought on slashdot that goes 'All patents are extremely broad and prior art can be found in anything that remotely looks like it might use a part of the patented thing' - which is wrong - patents can include already known technology but applied in new ways, for example this would have been something like 'A electric motor induced vibration system that responds to a gaming environment manipulated by user inputs on consumer entertainment console systems and their controllers'. The prior art of, or usage in items such as pagers or cell phones would not have a standing here because it doesnt pertain to the precise grounds covered by the patent.

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.

Hmm

[Cyno01]

Why does this have a Sony icon, but not the Dual Shock controller PS2 icon. It would seem more apropriate...

Re:Sleazbags

[Anonymous Coward]

So what you're saying is that a legitimate patent holder should not be able to fight against a large coporation who stole their patented device?

Wow ... That's a good idea ... What's next that you can't fight a coporation who causes you phisical harm?

Bad Year

[highwaytohell]

This is a real bad time for Sony.

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.

Re:Sleazbags

[ChronoReverse]

Nope. They patented the use of two unbalanced weighted motors in a video game controller. This was a very specific patent. Nintendo uses a single unbalanced weighted motor so they're okay. Microsoft paid the licensing fee. Sony didn't.

Re:Nintendo

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"And yet Nintendo has escaped lawsuit? I remember way back when getting the bulky rumble pak for the N64. Prior Art? "

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:Baa!

[engagebot]

You mean Immersion? Uhh, not only are they the guys who actually came up with it, but their stuff was licensed from Logitech for their devices. So what part of this don't you get. Immersion is not just some patent-whoring-lawyer-fest. They're pretty legit.

Re:Wow, this one was tough!

[Anonymous Coward]

Rooting for companies with bad patents because they're going after someone you don't like is wrong.

Explain how this is a bad patent.

Vibration has been used for feedback for ages, though not in game controllers.

This explanation is not sufficient. Where has vibration been used for feedback? Was it an intentional or incidental feature? Was it invariably caused by a condition or event, or was it arbitrarily triggered by an intentionally designed condition?

Better yet, since we're discussing a patent, was the vibration intentionally created by a mechanism that spins an eccentric weight? Do you know the number of the patent involved in this case? Have you read the claims?

Obviously not. That doesn't make you insigful, that makes you a troll.

Re:Wow, this one was tough!

[Chris Kamel]

As is rooting for companies with patents in general just because of a broken patent system. People seem to be pre-occupied with prejudices about the patent system that they hardly ever look at the case in question before they decide who should win.