Slashdot Mirror
Patent Suit Against Nintendo, Microsoft Dismissed
Saul J writes with an update to the patent lawsuit that was filed by Fenner Investments back in 2007 against Nintendo and Microsoft. The suit alleged that the two companies had infringed upon a patent for a joystick port interface. The trial was set to begin today, but now Judge Leonard Davis of the US District Court in Tyler, Texas has ruled that there is no need for a jury trial. One of Nintendo's lawyers said, "Nintendo has a long history of developing innovative products while respecting the intellectual property rights of others. We also vigorously defend patent lawsuits when we firmly believe that we have not infringed another party's patent, despite the risks that this policy entails."
"Nintendo has a long history of developing innovative products while respecting the intellectual property rights of others...." no-one wanted to say the same about microsoft?
Penis!
dgf
d dfd dvd
Wouldn't Ralph Baer (or Magnavox) have a patent on this? Given that all of that work was done in the 70s, I can't imagine nobody registered for a patent like this until 98.
I have only scanned the patent, however.... I see Nintendos+Microsofts point, can you seriously patent a simple circuit whos main component is a DQ flip-flop in 2001. The other major component seems to be an RC network. The whole device would seem to be an encoder circuit. (possibly patentable in 1960) I don't know about law (especially US law), however as I understand it this would only be eligible for copyright protection under EU law.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about the law and the above is only my personal opinion.
Where's the dismissal?
All I see is a one-line summary saying the judge decided against a jury trial. That isn't the same as dismissing the case. There's such a thing as a trial with a judge instead of a jury, common for civil cases. Where's the actual dismissal?
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Fenner Investments has had other cases of the same nature.
Continuing my comment above: Gamespot has a story about the beginning of the case.
Unfortunately, we cannot depend on Slashdot editors to do much research before they post a story.
Here are 10 Microsoft patents. I haven't investigated further, I'm not in a position to be a Slashdot editor, but the descriptions give the impression that what is being patented are obvious extensions of what is already available, or extensions of what should be open standards. They seem to be the kind of "advance" that would be routine when doing new development.
Unfortunately, there is at present a heavy dependence on using U.S. government power to make money. There also seems to be a lot of trolls trolling other trolls.
The circuit in the patent conceptually identical to the analog inputs on the classic PC gameport. They shouldn't have been granted a patent, as the idea is obvious and there is prior art. I don't think the devices they're suing over even use the same technique to read the joystick position.
I am relieved because with Microsofts history with patent suits Nintendo may have a few setbacks.
Its not my fault, someone put a wall in my way.
Now even Microsoft enters this sad, pathetic game. One day, no one will work anymore and no new ideas will be created - there will only be people suing each other over their patents on thinking, breathing and being alive.
Game Boy, anyone? Directional pad, anyone?
And don't forget the mainstreaming of a lot of techs that may have been done before, but were not successful on consoles (and copied verbatim) until Nintendo did it. Analog joystick (present, non-centering on the Atari 5200, I believe). Rumble. Touchscreen. Motion detection (even before Wii; they had some basic accelerometers in games all the way back with the Game Boy Color).
The Virtual Boy didn't survive, but Nintendo was doing what the other companies weren't: innovating. 3D was just starting out, and they had a system to render 3D the way we do now (N64), but then they also tried something that did 3D the way we see it, with actual stereograms.
Sometimes it doesn't succeed. The DS and the Wii could have gone the same way. But Nintendo tried. They went a different route, tried different things. Same, only better can only take you so far. Like Gunpei Yokoi (father of the Game Boy, but also the Virtual Boy) said, you can make a train go a little bit faster by tweaking it here, and there. But it takes a whole different frame of mind to get massive changes, from a normal train to a bullet train.
Nintendo has shown they've done such things. It doesn't make them gimmicks. The only worry is that they don't follow up, that they stagnate. But so far, they've done well.
It's really nice to see someone actually fight a stupid lawsuit rather than roll over and settle. Maybe we should let Nintendo run the insurance industry. Mario and Donkey Kong could do better than some of the current crop.
You have failed at Troll. Continue?
â' â' â" â" â â' â â' B A ^A ^ESC