Microsoft Sues Immersion Over Rumble Deal
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."
Step 1) By some miracle, weasel a provision into your settlement that forces the other company to pay you some money if your biggest competitor also settles.
Step 2) In a humorous turn of events, watch as the other company reaches a "business agreement" and weasels you out of your money.
Step 3) People's Court.
Get out the popcorn, this is going to be the weaseldom battle of the century.
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel.
More Twoson than Cupertino
With the elongated shape and "Wii" name, you can use the vibration feature for a lot more than anything from Sony and Microsoft!
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Gosh, I never thought that the name "Wii" might have a double entendre. Congratulations on your fresh insight, sir.
All this shit *should* be meaningless anyway. Patenting a rumble function? Brilliant! While we're at it, let's also grab disc-based game streaming technology, replacable human interface mechanisms, and multiple-resolution selectable display output.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I don't see the problem here. Microsoft and Immersion signed a contract that said "If the Immersion case with Sony is settled, Immersion pays Microsoft $XXX". They then settled their case, but chose to call it something other than a settlement. As long as the word 'settle'/'settlement' has a legally definable meaning, and that meaning covers the 'business arrangement' between Sony and Immersion, then Microsoft is owed money. There's nothing insidious or underhanded about it. If Immersion doesn't like it, they should have either not settled or not agreed to those terms in the first place.
What about a system where the Plaintiff pays in full for the defendants legal fees as well as the court fees if the defendant is found not guilty?
That would have the benefit of plaintiffs not bringing frivolous lawsuits to court, less they risk losing a bit of money themselves. Not only that it would remove the burden of court costs from the tax payers and place it on those who would bring ridiculous lawsuits to court.
Collector's Edition