If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IGN)   Not news: Patent troll sues Nintendo. News: Patent troll loses and ordered to pay all legal fees. Fark: Patent troll can't afford legal fees, so Nintendo obtains entire patent portfolio   (ign.com) divider line 69
    More: Cool, Nintendo, Sheriff's sale, patent portfolio, irreparable injury, legal fees  
•       •       •

8607 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Jan 2014 at 6:16 PM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-09 04:34:27 PM
Good.  fark those guys.
 
2014-01-09 04:43:27 PM
perfect
 
2014-01-09 04:48:02 PM
I guess the question I have is whether or not they're actually patent trolls. The story doesn't delve into any details so we're just left with Nintendo's word. Are they really patent trolls, or are they just some company that Nintendo's lawyer fleet has crushed for having the temerity to challenge them? Who do I direct my loathing at in this, or is it more of a "why not both?" deal?
 
2014-01-09 05:04:53 PM
Considering some of the litigation Nintendo faced in the past, would this count as irony?
 
2014-01-09 05:15:15 PM
Did they get anything good?
 
2014-01-09 05:18:10 PM

DrBenway: I guess the question I have is whether or not they're actually patent trolls. The story doesn't delve into any details so we're just left with Nintendo's word.


And the judgement of the trial jury. And the appeal court.

If they had a case, they had every chance to make it. And it seems pretty rare in the US that costs get awarded against the loser unless the court feels they didn't act in good faith (it's more commonplace in other countries).
 
2014-01-09 05:25:48 PM
 
2014-01-09 05:34:18 PM
Next up: Nintendo sues everyone.
 
2014-01-09 05:59:34 PM
i1.ytimg.com

Even Grumpy Cat smiles at this.
 
2014-01-09 06:02:13 PM

czetie: DrBenway: I guess the question I have is whether or not they're actually patent trolls. The story doesn't delve into any details so we're just left with Nintendo's word.

And the judgement of the trial jury. And the appeal court.

If they had a case, they had every chance to make it. And it seems pretty rare in the US that costs get awarded against the loser unless the court feels they didn't act in good faith (it's more commonplace in other countries).


And as I asked, is it possible that they're just some company crushed by a large corporation's army of attorneys? Or do you think such a thing to be outside the realm of possibility? Look, nothing would give me more pleasure than to learn of patent trolls getting thumped, but this article gives nothing but the end result. The more interesting part is in the dirt and details, the comeuppance, something lacking here.
 
2014-01-09 06:06:14 PM

BizarreMan: More info about the lawsuit here.


Ah! Thanks. This is more like it.
 
2014-01-09 06:20:27 PM
www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-01-09 06:33:43 PM
There is no good side here.  Nintendo is not some poor person on the street that needs help paying their legal bills.
 
2014-01-09 06:38:28 PM

Warlordtrooper: There is no good side here.  Nintendo is not some poor person on the street that needs help paying their legal bills.


I don't care about Nintendo winning. I care deeply about a patent troll losing, especially fatally.
 
2014-01-09 06:40:30 PM
WIting for the follow up when Nintendo trolls somebody over the same patent.
 
2014-01-09 06:43:38 PM
This is what you call crapping out.
 
2014-01-09 06:44:42 PM
Now they're playing with power. Ho. Ho. Ho.
 
2014-01-09 06:48:55 PM

flucto: Next up: Nintendo sues everyone.


Yeah, I half expect Nintendo to pick right up where IA left off with t the suing and trolling.
 
2014-01-09 06:49:10 PM
Patent link
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7121982.html

Computer interactive isometric exercise system and method for operatively interconnecting the exercise system to a computer system for use as a peripheral

A computer interactive isometric exercise system includes an effector, a sensor coupled at a selected location on the effector to measure a force applied by a user to the effector, where the applied force effects a strain on the effector, and control circuitry. The control circuitry includes a processor that receives and processes data corresponding to applied force information measured by the sensor for transference to a host computer. The processed data is transferred in a format compatible with the host computer and facilitates user interaction with the host computer in response to effector manipulation by the user. A plurality of effectors may further be combined together to form a system frame that provides a variety of isometric exercises for the user in combination with user interaction with the host computer.
 
2014-01-09 06:51:19 PM
Ah. Just like the case of Dr. Wiley v Hokkaido Prefecture.
 
2014-01-09 06:58:54 PM
I'd prefer if such a generic patent were simply thrown into the 'you can't farking patent such a bland generic idea you asshole' pile, the world would be a better place.
 
2014-01-09 07:00:15 PM

BizarreMan: More info about the lawsuit here.


that's classic. The inventor screws up the patent before the process even begins (by public display or sale 1+ years prior to filing for patent), and then some short bus troll buys it and tries to enforce it. If that any indication of Nintendo's new portfolio then they've earned themselves 3 or 4 cat lasers and method for making bitmaps worse
 
2014-01-09 07:04:43 PM
Glad to see a loser pays penalty ordered against the plaintiff when he/she/it loses. If only loser pays was used more often in civil litigation we could probably see an immediate vast decrease in years of court backlog. Especially cases when people feel they were vaguely wronged and immediately name 27 unrelated defendants all of whom are being sued for $200 million.
 
2014-01-09 07:07:58 PM

serial_crusher: WIting for the follow up when Nintendo trolls somebody over the same patent.


Since Nintendo not only argued but got a judgement ruling the patent invalid, if they tried to sue anyone over it, they'd be in the exact same boat of paying someone's legal costs.

There may, however, be other valid patents that Nintendo obtained.
 
2014-01-09 07:08:55 PM
Yay! Love to see patent trolls taken down.

On the other hand, I'll never forgive Nintendo for preventing game controller makers from using a sensible cross-shaped d-pad for so many years.
 
2014-01-09 07:10:39 PM

BizarreMan: More info about the lawsuit here.


Yeah they were definitely patent trolls


At trial Nintendo argued that attorneys' fees were warranted because IA Labs brought the litigation in bad faith and that the litigation was objectively baseless. Nintendo based this argument on the fact that the invention was beyond any dispute publicly demonstrated and on sale for more than one year before the patent application was filed, which rendered the subject matter embodied in that invention statutorily bared from ever being patented pursuant to pre-AIA 35 USC 102(b). IA Labs essentially argued that because patents are presumed valid the litigation could not be deemed objectively baseless. A rather poor argument given that they were found to know that the invention was barred from ever receiving a patent under 102(b).
 
2014-01-09 07:11:33 PM

DrBenway: And as I asked, is it possible that they're just some company crushed by a large corporation's army of attorneys? Or do you think such a thing to be outside the realm of possibility?


And as I said, it's within the realm of possibility, but very unlikely given how rare it is for the loser in a case like this to have to pay the other side's costs. The bar for such sanctions is set pretty high, precisely to avoid deterring small companies from justly protecting their patents against big ones. That fact, by itself, is very strong evidence that no, it's not the scenario you're suggesting. So I'm not sure why you think your question was unanswered.

Here's the court's memorandum (which was not that hard to find). Among other things it says that the patent was objectively basesless and and the lawsuit brought in bad faith, because IA's patent was invalid since it had publicly disclosed the invention more than a year before filing for the patent, and IA knew this, yet continued to assert infringement. That's the kind of shenanigans that courts frown upon, and the level of misconduct that results in sanctions.

Incidentally, although it's largely irrelevant, this isn't even a case of Little Guy vs. Big Guy: the Little Guy had an "outside investor" who had essentially bought a stake in the outcome of the lawsuit.

But all of that aside, the thing that I originally disagreed with was your assertion that this was "just Nintendo's word", which is plainly wrong, since at a minimum they had also convinced the original court and the appeals court that they were in the right, let alone that the plaintiff had committed misconduct.
 
2014-01-09 07:12:26 PM
Patent troll sues Nintendo. News: Patent troll loses and ordered to pay all legal fees. Fark: Patent troll can't afford legal fees, so Nintendo obtains entire patent portfolio

, sues Microsoft.
 
2014-01-09 07:14:15 PM

mr0x: Patent link
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7121982.html


In fact, I think you find it's this one: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7331226.html

"A force measurement system includes an effector device with a hollow interior, an inner support secured within the hollow interior of the effector device, and at least one sensor secured at a selected location to the inner support and configured to measure a force applied to the inner support. At least one outer surface portion of the inner support is coupled with at least one interior surface portion of the effector device such that forces applied to the effector device are at least partially transferred to the inner support for measurement by the sensor. "
 
2014-01-09 07:22:55 PM
There's a lawyer in orlando florida who specializes in patient infringment, he advertises like crazy and has sued just about everyone I can think of. Apparently he sues just to get a company to settle out rather then hang in court, uses that money to fund his bullshiat. I can't believe some companies who realize its a joke to settle out rather then fight it, but then again he goes after companies he knows for a fact would settle or walk out.

/He goes after anyone, if your business doesn't have a handycap parking or sidewalk, he sues you, I'm surprised he hasn't been found dead in a river by now
 
2014-01-09 07:34:58 PM

mr0x: Patent link
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7121982.html

Computer interactive isometric exercise system and method for operatively interconnecting the exercise system to a computer system for use as a peripheral

A computer interactive isometric exercise system includes an effector, a sensor coupled at a selected location on the effector to measure a force applied by a user to the effector, where the applied force effects a strain on the effector, and control circuitry. The control circuitry includes a processor that receives and processes data corresponding to applied force information measured by the sensor for transference to a host computer. The processed data is transferred in a format compatible with the host computer and facilitates user interaction with the host computer in response to effector manipulation by the user. A plurality of effectors may further be combined together to form a system frame that provides a variety of isometric exercises for the user in combination with user interaction with the host computer.


See, that's what I don't get: that doesn't say anything. Rather, it is so vague it's no better than a dictionary definition.
 
2014-01-09 07:36:31 PM

ArcadianRefugee: mr0x: Patent link
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7121982.html

Computer interactive isometric exercise system and method for operatively interconnecting the exercise system to a computer system for use as a peripheral

A computer interactive isometric exercise system includes an effector, a sensor coupled at a selected location on the effector to measure a force applied by a user to the effector, where the applied force effects a strain on the effector, and control circuitry. The control circuitry includes a processor that receives and processes data corresponding to applied force information measured by the sensor for transference to a host computer. The processed data is transferred in a format compatible with the host computer and facilitates user interaction with the host computer in response to effector manipulation by the user. A plurality of effectors may further be combined together to form a system frame that provides a variety of isometric exercises for the user in combination with user interaction with the host computer.

See, that's what I don't get: that doesn't say anything. Rather, it is so vague it's no better than a dictionary definition.


That's the abstract. It has no legal weight, and is only intended to be a rough guide for "should I read farther into the spec, or is this completely unrelated to my search." Think of it as a paragraph of search keywords, if that makes you feel better.
 
2014-01-09 07:42:22 PM
www.grizzlybomb.com
 
2014-01-09 07:44:41 PM

czetie: But all of that aside, the thing that I originally disagreed with was your assertion that this was "just Nintendo's word", which is plainly wrong, since at a minimum they had also convinced the original court and the appeals court that they were in the right, let alone that the plaintiff had committed misconduct.


So sue me. Dang.
 
2014-01-09 07:47:00 PM

Theaetetus: ArcadianRefugee: mr0x: Patent link
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7121982.html

Computer interactive isometric exercise system and method for operatively interconnecting the exercise system to a computer system for use as a peripheral

A computer interactive isometric exercise system includes an effector, a sensor coupled at a selected location on the effector to measure a force applied by a user to the effector, where the applied force effects a strain on the effector, and control circuitry. The control circuitry includes a processor that receives and processes data corresponding to applied force information measured by the sensor for transference to a host computer. The processed data is transferred in a format compatible with the host computer and facilitates user interaction with the host computer in response to effector manipulation by the user. A plurality of effectors may further be combined together to form a system frame that provides a variety of isometric exercises for the user in combination with user interaction with the host computer.

See, that's what I don't get: that doesn't say anything. Rather, it is so vague it's no better than a dictionary definition.

That's the abstract.


Ah.
 
2014-01-09 07:59:52 PM

Misconduc: There's a lawyer in orlando florida who specializes in patient infringment, he advertises like crazy and has sued just about everyone I can think of. Apparently he sues just to get a company to settle out rather then hang in court, uses that money to fund his bullshiat. I can't believe some companies who realize its a joke to settle out rather then fight it, but then again he goes after companies he knows for a fact would settle or walk out.


IT is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say:--
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:--
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:--

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"
 
2014-01-09 08:06:54 PM

Misconduc: There's a lawyer in orlando florida who specializes in patient infringment, he advertises like crazy and has sued just about everyone I can think of. Apparently he sues just to get a company to settle out rather then hang in court, uses that money to fund his bullshiat. I can't believe some companies who realize its a joke to settle out rather then fight it, but then again he goes after companies he knows for a fact would settle or walk out.

/He goes after anyone, if your business doesn't have a handycap parking or sidewalk, he sues you, I'm surprised he hasn't been found dead in a river by now


ADA lawsuits typically aren't settled with a judgement, they are generally settled with the business who is being sued being forced to make reasonable accommodations under the ADA law.
 
2014-01-09 08:07:46 PM

Warlordtrooper: There is no good side here.  Nintendo is not some poor person on the street that needs help paying their legal bills.


Have you seem Wii U sales? It's Atari Jaguar all over again.
 
2014-01-09 08:13:09 PM
Lee Jackson Beauregard:
IT is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say:--
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."


Thank you for posting this.
 
2014-01-09 08:32:56 PM
troll's patents aren't good enough to win a lawsuit.
nintendo wins all of troll's worthless patents.
nerds cheer.
 
2014-01-09 08:40:35 PM
Patents should be non-transferable.

If your company goes bust, the patents become public. If a company wants said patents, they hire you.
 
2014-01-09 08:43:02 PM
Good. Nothing better than seeing these assholes kneecapped.

On a related note for the nerds here to give an opinion on: Part of me wants to patent a software concept I've come up with recently. Not to bludgeon others on the head with, but so any work I have from college (of which there is some) doesn't become my employer's upon getting my first job. Also, to say "I have a patent". Any thoughts on this idea? I know it's not cheap, but that's why I'm asking.
 
2014-01-09 08:45:24 PM

doglover: Patents should be non-transferable.

If your company goes bust, the patents become public. If a company wants said patents, they hire you.


I'd like to see them split into two groups: ones for software/computer hardware and ones for everything else. Software patents would last from 2 to 5 years instead of the dreadfully long period they do now.
 
2014-01-09 08:50:05 PM

wildcardjack: Warlordtrooper: There is no good side here.  Nintendo is not some poor person on the street that needs help paying their legal bills.

Have you seem Wii U sales? It's Atari Jaguar all over again.


I wouldnt go THAT far, but yeah, Nintendo probably appreciates the little victory
 
2014-01-09 09:11:58 PM

DrBenway: czetie: DrBenway: I guess the question I have is whether or not they're actually patent trolls. The story doesn't delve into any details so we're just left with Nintendo's word.

And the judgement of the trial jury. And the appeal court.

If they had a case, they had every chance to make it. And it seems pretty rare in the US that costs get awarded against the loser unless the court feels they didn't act in good faith (it's more commonplace in other countries).

And as I asked, is it possible that they're just some company crushed by a large corporation's army of attorneys? Or do you think such a thing to be outside the realm of possibility? Look, nothing would give me more pleasure than to learn of patent trolls getting thumped, but this article gives nothing but the end result. The more interesting part is in the dirt and details, the comeuppance, something lacking here.


Doc,

If you read one of the links here, it seems AI filed a patent for something that nintendo had on sale a year before.  AI's argument was that their patent should be considered valid, so their case wasn't baseless.

Yeah, they're trolls.
 
2014-01-09 09:19:46 PM
neubranderinc.com
 
2014-01-09 09:50:45 PM

wildcardjack: Warlordtrooper: There is no good side here.  Nintendo is not some poor person on the street that needs help paying their legal bills.

Have you seem Wii U sales? It's Atari Jaguar all over again.


True, but the DS/3DS sales are what's keeping them afloat. They can have a shiatty 8th gen home console when their 8th gen portable is absolutely tearing it up.

And I'm saying that as someone who thinks Nintendo has gone pretty stagnant and should open up to becoming a developer like Sega and selling to PC/Sony/Microsoft. The Wii U is a failure (so far), but they've definitely covered their base with the portable market.
 
2014-01-09 09:50:49 PM

The6502Man: Doc,

If you read one of the links here, it seems AI filed a patent for something that nintendo had on sale a year before. AI's argument was that their patent should be considered valid, so their case wasn't baseless.

Yeah, they're trolls.


Thanks. Yeah, after I posted that second bit, I saw BizarreMan's link. That was pretty much exactly what I was asking about. Beyond that, I may wonder if there's anything at all worthwhile in the portfolio of patents that Nintendo's ended up with, but I'm not invested in the story enough to go digging for any further info.

One thing, though, that's perhaps more interesting in the larger picture is whether there's a move to go after the attorneys bringing these cases (rather than just beating down the people they represent).
 
2014-01-09 09:57:19 PM

Fano: Now they're playing with power. Ho. Ho. Ho.


did you just mashup an 80's advertising campaign with an 80's action movie?  Awesome!

/yippee ki yay, princess peach
 
2014-01-09 10:22:07 PM

DrBenway: I guess the question I have is whether or not they're actually patent trolls. The story doesn't delve into any details so we're just left with Nintendo's word. Are they really patent trolls, or are they just some company that Nintendo's lawyer fleet has crushed for having the temerity to challenge them? Who do I direct my loathing at in this, or is it more of a "why not both?" deal?


I don't know, how many IA Labs products have you purchased in your life?
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report