Nintendo Sued.... YANST?

[MrFire8808]

http://wii.ign.com/articles/750/750001p1.html

December 8, 2006 - In a surprising turn of events, Nintendo is already the target of litigious action concerning its newly released Wii console. California-based Interlink electronics has filed a complaint against Nintendo for what it has deemed to be a case of copyright infringement over the pointing functionalities of the Wiimote.

Gaming blog Kotaku has obtained a court filing, issued by the US District Court of Delaware, which accuses Nintendo of infringing on a patent filed previously by Interlink Electronics. The court filing claims that Interlink Electronics has suffered "loss of reasonable royalties, reduced sales and/or lost profits as a result of the infringing activities of" Nintendo.

The claim refers to a patent filed in February, 2005 which refers to a device titled "Trigger Operated Electronic Device." The patent describes the advice as a "trigger operated device in the nature of a pointing device for use with an electronic system such as a computer." The patent continues to describe a device which, on the surface, sounds an awful like the Wii's controller.

The complaint demands that Nintendo be enjoined and restrained from further infringing on the patent, presumably by taking the Wii off the market. Furthermore, the filing demands that the court order Nintendo to pay Interlink three times the assessed damages, including prejudgment interests and attorney fees. Additionally, the plaintiff is demanding a jury trial of any and all issues pertaining to the case.

 

[Printer Bandit]

nintendOWNED!

 

[ShotgunSteven]

If I recall correctly, the "technology" that Nintendo was supposedly copying didn't even work.

 

[z0mb13]

man that patent is so stupid..
trigger operated electronic device is so broad: all game controllers, tv remotes, cellphones, etc

 

[Futher]

Just a failing company looking for attention.

 

[waggy]

wouldnt the light gun that Nintendo have give them prior art? or something like that?

 

[halik]

public bitchslapping for bulsh!t patent litigation

 

[mugs]

1. The description of that patent could also describe the type of computer trackballs that are used for presentations - they look like a remote control and have a trigger on the bottom for clicking.
2. Nintendo had a very similar device a long time before 2005 - it was called the Super Scope. Same basic functionality.

I wish there were severe penalties for people who try to pull this crap.

Edit: I chose the Super Scope over the Zapper, because the Super Scope operates more similarly to the Wii remote with a transmitter and receiver, although the roles ar reversed with the Wii remote. But yeah, the Zapper would fit the broad description in the article as well)

 

[Nick5324]

Originally posted by: Futher
Just a failing company looking for (undeserved) money.

Fixed

 

[Ika]

If someone can sue Nintendo for this, couldn't they sue Sony for all the crap they copied...?

 

[Legendary]

Surely the old school Nintendo gun for Duck Hunt supersedes this?

 

[LordNoob]

It does not matter what the description (specification) of the patent says in determining if there is infringement. The district court must first construe the claim(s) at issue of the supposedly infringed patent, compare to what nintendo has done, and then see if it is infringement. That is assuming it even goes to trial.

 

[Wuffsunie]

Crap like this is why you should only be able to patent very specific things, not this vague sh!t that can be applied to any invention down the line and act as a quick money grab.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Crap like this is why you should only be able to patent very specific things, not this vague sh!t that can be applied to any invention down the line and act as a quick money grab.

actaully i think if you bring BS lawsuits like this where there is a lot of proof saying that the patiant is bogus. then you should get nailed for damages for it.

 

[Wuffsunie]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Crap like this is why you should only be able to patent very specific things, not this vague sh!t that can be applied to any invention down the line and act as a quick money grab.

Actually i think if you bring BS lawsuits like this where there is a lot of proof saying that the patent is bogus. then you should get nailed for damages for it.

I wish there was some way to enforce a frivolity penalty against lawsuits. Like, if you lose, the jury/judge have the ability to not just say that you lost, but that you wasted everyone's time with this useless crap and are responsible for all court costs and all costs to the other party, as a bare minimum. I bet that would cut down on a lot of lawsuits.

 

[eelw]

Smith and Wesson should just sue this company since they also have a trigger on their product.

 

[brtspears2]

United States Patent 6,850,221 and 5,670,988. I never knew you could patent your own invention twice.

When I look at the patent, it is merely nothing more than a wireless mouse in the air, with a IBM thinkpad eraser head pointer, a bonus button, and a trigger.

Then I found this item on amazon. Looks something like this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00062.../ref=pd_cp_e_title/103-2825610-7742235

There are tons of these out there, wireless mouse, designed for boardroom presentations. I'm guessing someone can't sell their overpriced devices.

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: Printer Bandit
nintendOWNED!

The patent system in the states sucks

"Trigger Operated Electronic Device." The patent describes the advice as a "trigger operated device in the nature of a pointing device for use with an electronic system such as a computer." The patent continues to describe a device which, on the surface, sounds an awful like the Wii's controller."

What about the nintendo gun with the original system 20 years ago?

 

[Horus]

Originally posted by: z0mb13
man that patent is so stupid..
trigger operated electronic device is so broad: all game controllers, tv remotes, cellphones, etc

Trigger-operated electronic device? How about the damn lightgun?

 

[mercanucaribe]

GUYS. THE EXCERPT FROM THE PATENT IS NOT THE WHOLE TEXT.

"Trigger Operated Electronic Device." The patent describes the advice as a "trigger operated device in the nature of a pointing device for use with an electronic system such as a computer." The patent continues to describe a device which, on the surface, sounds an awful like the Wii's controller.

See how it says "the patent continues"?? You think it just says "trigger operated pointing device" for 4 more pages?

 

[mercanucaribe]

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pars...21.PN.&OS=PN/6,850,221&RS=PN/6,850,221

It describes a joystick with a trigger that works as a mouse. It doesn't say anything about moving it around to control the cursor.

 

[Quasmo]

Umm considering the fact that the Wiimote has a camera in it and this thing doesn't it transmits IR

 

[Yzzim]

Here's a good article about the lawsuit. Don't think this lawsuit stands a chance.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
GUYS. THE EXCERPT FROM THE PATENT IS NOT THE WHOLE TEXT.

"Trigger Operated Electronic Device." The patent describes the advice as a "trigger operated device in the nature of a pointing device for use with an electronic system such as a computer." The patent continues to describe a device which, on the surface, sounds an awful like the Wii's controller.

See how it says "the patent continues"?? You think it just says "trigger operated pointing device" for 4 more pages?

Of course not, but Nintendo had a device that worked very similarly to the pointing functionality of the Wii remote 10 years before this other device was patented.

 

[Matt2]

Too bad, I really dont like Nintendo.