Patent Trolls

Posted by RabbidMickeyMouse on Dec. 12, 2006, 5:06 p.m.

I read an article a couple of months ago about the issue of patent infringements concerning videogames in EDGE magazine (E165).

Quote:
RIM (Research In Motion) is the wireless solutions manufacturer behind the popular Blackberry wireless platform, and its protracted legal battle with patent-holding company NTP represents such a low point in patent law’s chequered past that it’s seen by some observers as a potential catalyst for widespread reform. It is, in fact, a trolling masterclass. “These companies have no intention to create a product. â€?All they intend to do is exploit companies that do make consumer products, and that’s wrong from any angle you look at it.â€? Founded by Thomas Campana Jr, a communications engineer who owned eight 1991 patents related to the transmission of emails through paging networks, NTP’s sole function was to administer and economically exploit those patents, which it did over four years at the expense of alleged patent-infringer RIM, culminating in an out-of-court settlement of over 600 million.

AVG (American Video Graphics), meanwhile, acquired a series of patents filed in 1987 by William G. Waller of innovations company Tektronix, Inc. Two of these, brought in 2004, had particularly far reaching implications for common console development practices, and the company proceeded to sue 12 separate publishers for infringement. The primary technology involved was that of spherical panning – a camera movement and zoom technique in which the camera moves around a specific focal object. In its case against Sega, the company’s lawyers cited Super Monkey Ball 2 as an offending example. Recent financial filings by Atari, meanwhile, disclosed an AVG-related settlement of $300,000.

The practices of such patent-trolls are one of the increasing reasons that creating innovative games are becoming harder to do in today’s world. Development companies have to double-check with their legal department as to whether they’ve infringed on the patent of companies such as AVG, on top of having to check whether the design of their games hasn’t mirror that of another game.

Nintendo’s Wii is no different to such circumstances. A company, by the name of Interlink, has taken Nintendo to court recently, asking that a restraining order be placed against the Wii, and that Nintendo pay Interlink "assessed damages" as a result of patent infringement related to the Wiimote’s trigger design.

Unlike Sony’s eventual defeat against Immersion over the rumble feature of the PlayStation’s controller, Microsoft and Nintendo opted to pay them out-of-court early on, which may be the end result in Nintendo’s case with Interlink, as to keep production of the Wii stable.

Comments

Jabberwock 17 years, 11 months ago

Yeah. Geez, a restraining order? That would really suck, for us as well as Nintendo.

KaBob799 17 years, 11 months ago

Interlink is just doing that to get paid out of court, from what I can tell they really dont have much of an argument.

Plus notice how they waited until the wii was nice and popular so it would help them get publicity.

RabbidMickeyMouse 17 years, 11 months ago

Interlink filed their patent only a few months before President Iwata of Nintendo, revealed the new controller at the 2005(2006?) Tokyo Game Show.

My bet is that Interlink found someone inside Nintendo to give enough details about the contoller to file a patent related to its design.

Cesar 17 years, 11 months ago

they should really make a law where the patent must be around a year to five years old before they can sue for patent infringement, as development of the Wii Remote began MUCH earlier than the patent

melee-master 17 years, 11 months ago

Interlink has a weak case.

Cesar 17 years, 11 months ago

true that is, as it is for point and CLICK, not meant for the wii remote, plus, the wii remote has many more functions, so interlink's case is VERY weak

kafeithekeaton 17 years, 11 months ago

Quote:
they should really make a law where the patent must be around a year to five years old before they can sue for patent infringement, as development of the Wii Remote began MUCH earlier than the patent
Okay, that gives people one to five years to steal the patent. That defeats the whole purpose. Everyone will want the thing then, not later. The money is to be made at that time, and people would steal the idea and sell it.