Sony loses immersion appeal

[njiska]

OK bitch about the news posting all you want, but this is BIG.

From Joystiq:
Just to bring you up to speed: Immersion, a company specializing in haptic technology, in 2003 sued both Sony and Microsoft for patent infringement, claiming both companies used Immersion's intellectual property (IP) in their console's controllers. Microsoft settled out of court (buying a share of Immersion in the process), but Sony fought on. Sony lost, and the judge ruled that Sony must suspend the sale of "Playstation consoles, Dualshock controllers," and a few dozen games, including Vice City, Final Fantasy X, and Metal Gear Solid 2. Sony filed for appeal, and has been allowed to sell all aforementioned products while the decision is under appeal.

The Wall Street Journal this morning reports that a federal judge rejected Sony's appeal and upheld the earlier decision (which also includes a $90.7 million payment by Sony to Immersion). Sony argued that Craig Thorner, a former paid consultant to Immersion, submitted testimony on Sony's behalf. However, US District Judge Claudia Wilken noted that Thorner was an "unreliable" witness, citing "strong evidence" that suggest Thorner's testimony was directly affected by the $150,000 Sony had paid him as "advance royalty" to license Thorner's patents in the future.

It seems very ridiculous that Sony would have to halt production on its flagship console, as well as most of the company's best-selling titles, but that may very well be the case here. Could this be a reason for Sony's (conceptual) "boomerang" PS3 controller? If the PlayStation 3 cannot utilize its force feedback technology from the past, how is this going to affect backwards compatibility? Chalk this up as another issue for Sony, alongside Cell processor issues, Blu-ray issues, delay rumors, and more than a few ad campaigns that have backfired.

[pacmanhat]

Damn. The reasons to dislike Sony are really piling up.

Anyways, I'm really interested to see how this affects things. It's gonna be weird to see Playstations completely off of every shelf in the country (if that's what actually ends up happening), but I guess we'll have to wait and see. This seems like one of those things that could mean nothing or everything. In the mean time...

[Cmtz]

I just don't see Sony's PS2 going away.

[njiska]

I just don't see Sony's PS2 going away.

Nor do I, but that's the ruling. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Lozza]

Now is the time to buy a PS2 and the above mentioned games, just in case!

[Cmtz]

I just don't see Sony's PS2 going away.

Nor do I, but that's the ruling. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

I would like see what happens. I just think Sony can still wrap all this stuff with paper work. Just like big companies.

[pacmanhat]

I just don't see Sony's PS2 going away.

Nor do I, but that's the ruling. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

I would like see what happens. I just think Sony can still wrap all this stuff with paper work. Just like big companies.

My thoughts exactly. If it does happen, though, it could mean a serious blow not just to the PS2, but the PS3 as well.

[badinsults]

It goes to show you, if you are going to create a mass produced product, make sure that you aren't treading on the toes of other companies.

[njiska]

Apparently the appeal over the injuction of sales is still pending,which is good for Sony i guess, but given the ruling on the infringment appeal it doesn't bode well for injunction.

[MrRoboto19XX]

This is shaping up to be the precursor to one heck of a console war.

[InsaneDavid]

So many will side against Sony here and say "they should have known" and so forth, yet when I brought up the lawsuit where Atari sued (and won against) Sega for the design of the Mega Drive / Genesis infringing on Atari's European market technology patents in Classic Gaming - I had a hard time proving it, and everyone went on and on how that's so stupid and how dumb it was to sue over something stupid like that, and how could Sega no realize that and so forth. Not trying to flame or be a fanboy, I just find it funny. Just in case anyone cares about that (and shouldn't) the thread is here.

Now back to the Sony controller problems. Honestly from the start Immersion went "Money? Me too! Me too!" and tossed up the lawsuit. Yes, they do have the right to do that but the dirty pool played in the past and present concerning this is going to continue to drag it through the mud. In the end however, I say the almighty dollar will satisfy them, as it does any other company.

[njiska]

Now back to the Sony controller problems. Honestly from the start Immersion went "Money? Me too! Me too!" and tossed up the lawsuit. Yes, they do have the right to do that but the dirty pool played in the past and present concerning this is going to continue to drag it through the mud. In the end however, I say the almighty dollar will satisfy them, as it does any other company.

Actually that's not true. Immerrsion has long held the pattent on this technology and the tech is their major source of income. This isn't a frivilous lawsuit like the JPEG patent or DVR patent or SCO, this is a smaller company defending it's primary source of income.

Haptic tech is really all the company is.

[le geek]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

[njiska]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

Here's a bit on that from an article in Forbes last year:

Moreover, Immersion Chief Executive Victor Viegas says the settlement also includes a sub-license that allows Microsoft to cut license agreements on Immersion's technology with other companies--including Sony. Under such a deal Microsoft would share license revenue. But should Immersion settle with Sony, the latter would be obligated to pay Microsoft a minimum of $15 million. That's pocket change to a company that generates billions in cash every year, but could be viewed as a symbolic victory for Microsoft over Sony.

[pacmanhat]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

Here's a bit on that from an article in Forbes last year:

Moreover, Immersion Chief Executive Victor Viegas says the settlement also includes a sub-license that allows Microsoft to cut license agreements on Immersion's technology with other companies--including Sony. Under such a deal Microsoft would share license revenue. But should Immersion settle with Sony, the latter would be obligated to pay Microsoft a minimum of $15 million. That's pocket change to a company that generates billions in cash every year, but could be viewed as a symbolic victory for Microsoft over Sony.

This is precisely why I prefer MS to Sony as a company in general. They're smarter, they care more about their customers, and they aren't nearly as greedy.

[§ Gideon §]

According to the rules, the court made the right decision--but our rules are pretty f'ed up at this point, so I don't know what to think.

Regardless, Sony decided to join the corporate game, so Sony deserves to face the consequences--however ridiculous they may be. We'll see what happens. I wonder if this'll even be in the papers tomorrow...

[Lothars]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

Here's a bit on that from an article in Forbes last year:

Moreover, Immersion Chief Executive Victor Viegas says the settlement also includes a sub-license that allows Microsoft to cut license agreements on Immersion's technology with other companies--including Sony. Under such a deal Microsoft would share license revenue. But should Immersion settle with Sony, the latter would be obligated to pay Microsoft a minimum of $15 million. That's pocket change to a company that generates billions in cash every year, but could be viewed as a symbolic victory for Microsoft over Sony.

This is precisely why I prefer MS to Sony as a company in general. They're smarter, they care more about their customers, and they aren't nearly as greedy.

LMFAO

Microsoft is not smarter than sony, no way in hell are they smarter

They also don't care about the customers, most bigger companies don't, but your post there shows your seeming like a microsoft fanboy, most corporations are just as bad but to say that about microsoft is laughable at best.
but I definitly don't agree with Sony Losing this lawsuit,

that's life though.

[njiska]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

Here's a bit on that from an article in Forbes last year:

Moreover, Immersion Chief Executive Victor Viegas says the settlement also includes a sub-license that allows Microsoft to cut license agreements on Immersion's technology with other companies--including Sony. Under such a deal Microsoft would share license revenue. But should Immersion settle with Sony, the latter would be obligated to pay Microsoft a minimum of $15 million. That's pocket change to a company that generates billions in cash every year, but could be viewed as a symbolic victory for Microsoft over Sony.

This is precisely why I prefer MS to Sony as a company in general. They're smarter, they care more about their customers, and they aren't nearly as greedy.

LMFAO

Microsoft is not smarter than sony, no way in hell are they smarter

They also don't care about the customers, most bigger companies don't, but your post there shows your seeming like a microsoft fanboy, most corporations are just as bad but to say that about microsoft is laughable at best.
but I definitly don't agree with Sony Losing this lawsuit,

that's life though.

Sony smarter? Hmm lets check the facts. Microsoft horribly rich company running in the black. Sony running heavily in the red.

When it comes to business MS is historically the smarter company and that's provable.

When it comes to customer service they're both rating pretty poor (although Sony ranks slightly worse in my mind because of the DRE fiasco).

Microsoft has come a long way in customer care from the evil giant they use to be.

[Richter Belmount]

Heh I hope sony finally learns from microsoft thats all I Have to say , dont do things that can risk business.

[Lothars]

Don't forget, when Microsoft settled with the company, they became a large shareholder. So in effect if Sony settled and had to pay royalties per unit sold they would be effectively putting money the coffers of their competition.

Ben

Here's a bit on that from an article in Forbes last year:

Moreover, Immersion Chief Executive Victor Viegas says the settlement also includes a sub-license that allows Microsoft to cut license agreements on Immersion's technology with other companies--including Sony. Under such a deal Microsoft would share license revenue. But should Immersion settle with Sony, the latter would be obligated to pay Microsoft a minimum of $15 million. That's pocket change to a company that generates billions in cash every year, but could be viewed as a symbolic victory for Microsoft over Sony.

This is precisely why I prefer MS to Sony as a company in general. They're smarter, they care more about their customers, and they aren't nearly as greedy.

LMFAO

Microsoft is not smarter than sony, no way in hell are they smarter

They also don't care about the customers, most bigger companies don't, but your post there shows your seeming like a microsoft fanboy, most corporations are just as bad but to say that about microsoft is laughable at best.
but I definitly don't agree with Sony Losing this lawsuit,

that's life though.

Sony smarter? Hmm lets check the facts. Microsoft horribly rich company running in the black. Sony running heavily in the red.

When it comes to business MS is historically the smarter company and that's provable.

When it comes to customer service they're both rating pretty poor (although Sony ranks slightly worse in my mind because of the DRE fiasco).

Microsoft has come a long way in customer care from the evil giant they use to be.

I actually never said Sony is smarter than Microsoft but just that Microsoft is not smarter than Sony

They both have made pretty stupid mistakes, I still don't think that Microsoft is the smarter company, but they do screw up big time as does Sony.