Slashdot Log In
Nintendo Loses Controller Patent Lawsuit
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:59 PM
from the break-out-the-brain-computer-interface dept.
from the break-out-the-brain-computer-interface dept.
kryogen1x alerts us to coverage at 1up indicating that Nintendo controller may soon become scarce — Nintendo lost in court to Anascape over analog sticks in their Wii and GameCube controllers.This isn't the first time the big manufacturers have been targeted in lawsuits involving features in their controllers. From the article: "The lawsuit concerns the analog sticks in the Classic Controller and GameCube controllers, which Texas-based Anascape Ltd. claims to hold a patent on that Nintendo violated. The court has ruled in favor of Anascape, and US District Judge Ron Clark has rejected Nintendo's request for a new trial. As a result, Clark said he will put a ban on the sale of the controllers (which includes sales of GameCube systems) starting tomorrow, July 23, unless Nintendo posts a bond or puts royalties into an escrow account."
Related Stories
[+]
PS2 Controller Suit Goes Badly For Sony 197 comments
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."
[+]
Nintendo and Microsoft in Suit Over Controller Patents 128 comments
Via Kotaku, an article at the Inquirer discussing a patent suit brought against Microsoft and Nintendo over controller technologies. Anascape Ltd, a Texas firm, claims the two companies have infringed on over a dozen of its held patents. From the article: "Anascape alleges 6,222,525 'Image Controller with Sheet Connected Sensors' was also breached, as well as 6,343, 991 'Game Control with Analog Pressure Sensor' and 6,344,791 'Variable Sensor with Tactile Feedback'. As well as 6,347,997 'Analog Controls Housed with Electronic Displays', 6,351,205 'Variable Conductance Sensor' (a different one) and 6,400, 303 'Remote Controller with Analog Pressure Sensor' (a different one)."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Could be worse (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Could be worse (Score:5, Funny)
my GameCube controllers are very jiggly and have huge nullzones.
I dated a girl once who fit that description.
Parent
Re:Could be worse (Score:5, Funny)
I think it's time to be wary if the girl you're dating has an analog stick, let alone two.
Parent
You can have my Wii Controller... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You can have my Wii Controller... (Score:5, Funny)
Quick! Put the strap on so they can't get it even out of your cold dead hands!
Parent
Re:You can have my Wii Controller... (Score:4, Funny)
I made a dent in someone's newly plastered and painted roof while playing bowling, a little while after saying I didn't like using the strap. Oops.
Parent
Prior art? (Score:5, Insightful)
terms (Score:5, Informative)
This is a bit of a pedantic response, but "prior art" means something different. Prior art is evidence of the patented invention, or something substantially similar, having already been invented by someone else, earlier than the patent holder's earliest evidence of invention. Prior art usually invalidates a patent, since only the first inventor can patent something.
What you're asking about is the case of someone sitting on a patent for a while, not enforcing it despite being aware of the violation, and then enforcing it later. There is no automatic statutory ban on this, unlike with trademarks, where you can lose the trademark after a period of not enforcing it. There is a general legal doctrine of "estoppel", which prohibits you from inducing someone else into doing something and then suing them; for example, if you told someone you forgave their debt (even if you didn't legally sign documents to discharge the debt), and they relied on your statement to that effect and bought a house, and now you want the money back and they don't have it because they bought a house with it, they could invoke estoppel since you misled them to their detriment about the status of the debt. In cases like this it's a bit harder to invoke---it's not like the patent trolls actively say "hey anyone can use our patent!" and then later "ha ha just kidding, see you in court!" Instead, they keep quiet for a while, and then sue later, so you'd have to argue their silence was acquiescing to or encouraging the use implicitly, and that it was done intentionally for the purpose of getting the defendant to rely on the patented technology before suing. This has worked on occasion.
Parent
Re:Prior art? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Prior art? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The N64 had an analog stick and rumble pak in 1997.
Re:Prior art? (Score:5, Informative)
More details of the patents in question can be fond at this Ars Technica article [arstechnica.com] from couple of years ago.
Note that at least one of the patents in question was sent back to USPTO for reexamination, and likely to be overturned (once the various lawyers have exhausted their revenue stream on making comments either way).
The #1 indication that this is a patent troll is seen by it being filed in the Eastern Texas District -- Anascape appears to be nothing but a straw company for allowing Brad Armstrong and his lawyers to file in Eastern Texas, which has by far the highest rate of finding for the accuser in patent lawsuits. To the point that it's become a rubberstamping farce, and I can't see how higher courts let this go on as it does -- judges like Mr. Clark [justia.com] would, in any more civilized society be disbarred (I almost wrote defrocked, which wouldn't be far from the truth in Texas), and put in a pillory for good measure.
Parent
More Detailed Article (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awZrhG5wo.jw
Not enough patent trolls (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently the big corportations are not hurt enough to change their attitudes towards patents. May more ridiculous patent suits appear, and clear everybody's eyes that patents are sucking and they are obstacles to (rather than protection of) innovation.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Patent Office penalties (Score:5, Interesting)
Here is one way to fix the problem: let the Patent Office be heavily penalized for every patent overturned by the courts. If the Office goes bankrupt as a result of its own negligence, too bad, let it die. Congress can always start a new Office with completely different management.
At the moment, the Patent Office is too unaccountable; there is little penalty for doing shoddy work. The threat of bankruptcy might concentrate a few minds over there.
Re:Patent Office penalties (Score:5, Funny)
Here is one way to fix the problem: let the Patent Office be heavily penalized for every patent overturned by the courts. If the Office goes bankrupt as a result of its own negligence, too bad, let it die. Congress can always start a new Office with completely different management.
At the moment, the Patent Office is too unaccountable; there is little penalty for doing shoddy work. The threat of bankruptcy might concentrate a few minds over there.
I like this line of thought, but you are way too generous. Why penalize with money? Give each patent examiner a strike when their decisions are over turned. After three strikes, kill them. ( Most would retire after two )
Hmmm...this plan could bring accountability to other governmental agencies too. Imagine every congressperson getting a strike when a law that he/she passed was found to be unconstitutional.
Parent
Possibly the patent in question (Score:3, Informative)
(http://www.kotaku.com.au/games/2008/07/nintendos_patent_case_the_unanswered_questions-2.html [kotaku.com.au])
I had a good chuckle.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hah... Tell that to MadCatz, or Game Infinity, or Pelican Accessories and others. They seem to be doing quite well at making alternative controllers. (With analogue sticks!)
At what point (Score:3, Insightful)
What's the difference? (Score:4, Interesting)
Patent troll does not mean "patent I dont like" (Score:4, Interesting)
Anascape may be an IP company, but it doesnt mean Brand Armstrongs patents are invalid.
This guy has 32 patents issued to his name.
http://globaldevices.com/ [globaldevices.com]
Now the validity of these patents may be called into question. Looking at the patents it doesnt bring to mind submarine patents as much as the question...shouldnt the person who patents something actually be able to demonstrate a working prototype before a final patent is issued not just a paper invention?
Needless Hysteria (Score:4, Informative)
Sales are not going to stop. Nintendo will, of course, either post a bond or put the royalties in an escrow account, and continue on manufacturing the infringing items while they appeal. If they win on appeal, they get the money back. If they lose, they pay it, and pay a reasonable royalty from then on, or change the design of their devices to not infringe.
Nintendo basically admitted infringement! (Score:5, Informative)
Nintendo used an interesting strategy. They basically conceded that the Gamecube controllers and Wii Classic controller infringed, and concentrated on making sure that only those would be found to infringe. The Wii remote was also accused, and their goal was to keep that from being found to infringe.
Judge Clark commented on this when denying Nintendo's motion for remittitur:
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Informative)
Anascape Ltd. is a Texas-based computer firm specializing in analog-related technology.[1] According to the Dun & Bradstreet database, it is located at "15487 Joseph Rd Tyler, TX."[2] All of Anascape's patents, however, are registed to "Brad Armstrong" of Carson City, Nevada. [3] The companies slogan is "Anascape - The Analog Landscape of the Future!!!"[1]
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Anascape [nationmaster.com]
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Informative)
Nintendo Co. Ltd. (Nintendo) has been accused of infringing/and or still infringing on the patents listed:
Patent # Title
6,222,525 "Image controllers with sheet connected sensors"
6,344,791 "Variable sensor with tactile feedback"
6,351,205 "Variable-conductance sensor"
6,563,415 "Analog sensor(s) with snap-through tactile feedback"
6,906,700 "3D controller with vibration"
What could the Classic/GCN controllers violate that the Nunchuk doesn't? Probably the analog triggers that *click* when pushed down all the way. "Analog sensor(s) with snap-through tactile feedback" seems an accurate description.
posting AC because I modded down trolls.
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Informative)
6,563,415 "Analog sensor(s) with snap-through tactile feedback" - This one is invalid through prior art, i.e. atari 2600 joysticks had snap-through tactile feedback.
6,351,205 "Variable-conductance sensor" - This is the stupidest fucking patent, this is just a potentiometer. The patent office is really shining in the stupidity here.
6,344,791 "Variable sensor with tactile feedback" - another stupid ass patent with prior art going back to the 80's. i.e. race steering wheels used in arcade games like pole position.
Maybe I can get a patent for dumb ass patent troll...
6,245,892 "dumb ass patent troll" - Hey I'm going to start sueing!!!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
6,563,415 "Analog sensor(s) with snap-through tactile feedback" - This one is invalid through prior art, i.e. atari 2600 joysticks had snap-through tactile feedback.
Atari 2600 joysticks were digital, not analog.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you don't consider that prior art then look at the controllers for Radio controlled airplanes and cars. I think Airtronics and Futaba could sue the living shit out of anascape. This goes back to the 60's, My dad had a Heathkit R/C rig that used analog sensors with snap-through tactile feedback... BTW even though the 2600 joystick was in essence digital, all the inputs were read through analog mechanisms.
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Insightful)
did the inventor produce working samples?
did the inventor ever attempt to manufacture or license his new idea?
or did he think of ways of joining existing technologies together, patent it, and wait for some poor schlepp to try _actually_ doing it?
thus, the cries of 'patent troll' appear to be in order here.
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Informative)
What people here don't understand is that you have to read the claims of a patent to know what mechanism really is patented. The claims describe a minimum set of properties that a device should have in order to be covered by the patent. For example:
6,563,415 "Analog sensor(s) with snap-through tactile feedback" [google.com] - in essence, it is about a button that does 'click' when you press it AND has analog readout. For prior art, you need a combination of these two properties integrated into a single device. The fact that there have been analog joysticks with a clicky button forever is not relevant. In addition there are some technical details on how the click is produced and how the analog reading is done. Make a pressure sensitive button with a capacitive pressure sensor instead of a conductance sensor and it is not covered by this patent.
6,351,205 "Variable-conductance sensor" [google.com] - this is a variation of the previous one with two click points during pressing the button.
3D controller with vibration [google.com] - if you read the claim, this seems to be a very complex device with several buttons attached in a specific way combined with potentiometers. The patent was filed in 2000. An Nintendo engineer who knew about this patent could probably have designed around it if he wanted to.
So I don't think the patents are covered by prior art in this case. There is another requirement for a patent, and that is whether the invention is obvious to someone skilled in the art. That is much more fuzzy. In general, if the patent is a new combination of three or more existing inventions, it is non-obvious. If it is only two existing inventions combined, then it depends. I'm not into game controllers, so I can't judge that here.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Insightful)
What a coincidence, headquartered only a short drive away from Patent Troll Central, a.k.a., the US District Court, Eastern District of Texas.
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:4, Informative)
I've seen private inventors being run over by big business, who has a tendency to totally ignore patents that isn't owned by themselves, too many times to feel the least bit upset when one of them actually get some compensation for his patents.
Parent
Re:I couldn't find info about Anascape (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hard to say who to root for, if anyone.
How about basing your decision on the merit of the case rather than which side you "like" more?
In any case, the patent is almost certainly overbroad and/or obvious and never should have been issued, and they were only sued in the court that they were because it is notoriously biased in favor of patent trolls.
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Or it's a case of choosing a venue where the judge knows a patent from a potato, where the magistrates are experienced with patent matters for expedited pretrial proceedings, and where the docket that isn't clogged with federal criminal cases that prevent timely resolution of civil matters. Very little in a patent case is decided by the jury and much of what the jury has power over can be corrected on appeal should the jury err. The Eastern District of Texas (and other "rocket dockets") are popular with plaintiffs because they provide the plaintiff with a predictable litigation timetable. They all appeal to the same place (CAFC) so they all follow the same law and extraordinary jury outcomes will be subjected to the same review.
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Insightful)
"are popular with plaintiffs because they provide the plaintiff with a predictable litigation timetable"
And because the Eastern District of Texas is famous for making sure the plaintiff wins most of the time.
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Informative)
Once upon a time, a certain area of Texas was popular for tort plaintiffs because it frequently produced enormous damage awards, thus providing employment and tourism revenue for an otherwise inconsequential part of the United States. Then, a series of tort reform laws were passed to curtail the activities of the offending courts. So, in search of a new means of corrupting the judicial system to keep a constant flow of legal tourism through Mayberry, a judge from Marshall, Texas decided to publish a paper on patent rules.
Having a judge who understands patent law is an excellent proposition, except when the judge intends to contort the law to draw business into his remote domain and benefit his local associates.
Who decides where a case is brought when the defendant (say, a national corporation) is subject to personal jurisdiction throughout the entire country? The plaintiff. How do you persuade patent plaintiffs to bring lawsuits in your backwards town? By handing out numerous favorable decisions and large damage awards.
And so, E.D.Tex and Marshall, TX are the bane of patent defense attorneys throughout the United States, and patents of doubtful validity regularly receive the imprimatur of a federal district court.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit doesn't agree to hear appeals for every case, nor should it. That would be impossible.
In conclusion, we should never have let Texas into the Union in the first place.
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:As usual ... (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder if part of those settlements was to sue nintendo to bankrupcy.
Parent
Re:Prior Art (Score:5, Informative)
The earliest mainstream console with an analog stick I'm aware of was on the (82?) GCE Vectrex, though from your link the infamously terrible 5200 stick predates it by a few months.
Anyway, this patent is about analog sticks with built in rumble packs. Previous controllers (N64,DC) used plug in modules instead. Building one into the controller itself, wow, go go patent trolls.
Parent
Clearly the system works (Score:5, Informative)
These patents involving a stick as a proportional control for direction are creative, innovative and represent a clever improvement in the art. What I'm not sure of is how the inventor is alive still, as the idea has been around for quite a while [iwebland.com], as shown by these craft which used the identical principle.
Aw, who am I kidding? If there were no patents all of the people involved here could have spent the last year of their lives doing something useful instead of quite carefully and at horrific cost arriving at a conclusion destined to be overturned on appeal. All they've accomplished is to drive up the cost of everything we buy and impede the progress of science and the useful arts.
Patents and copyright need to go away [abolishcopyright.com].
Parent
A wasted comment? (Score:5, Funny)
Cmdr Taco is not yet charging by the comment. It's not necessary to do so because the comments are made from 100% recycled electrons. The comment that bothers you expresses succinctly the shock that such an event could occur in a supposedly fair system. Complain that it's rude or vulgar. It is, and so are the events that induced it. Don't complain that it says nothing, because it conveys an emotion felt by many of us. I'm sure some famous person once said "The trick of writing well is to say what you mean, then stop."
Parent