Nintendo's appeal on reduced US$ 21M verdict denied |
Ó
The decision on Nintendo of America's appeal regarding the infringement case they lost has been denied. Therefore, the gaming giant will still pay US$ 21 million to Anascape, Ltd.Let's trackback a bit on this case, in case you just tuned in now. 2006, Texas-based Anascape Ltd. filed a case against Nintendo of America for supposedly infringing upon Anascape's patents related to video game controllers. Which controllers, you ask? GameCube's, GameCube Wavebird's, Wii's Classic controller and remote were the models of infringement
in question.
Nintendo lost last month and was thus ordered to pay the damages mentioned above. At that time, their lawyers were hopeful that they will be able to lower the damages they'd have to pay through an appeal. However just a couple of days ago, this appeal was denied.
In a press release from the firm representing Anascape, McKool Smith, it was divulged that the Hon. Ron Clark of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division, denied defendant's motion for a reduced verdict. He held that the jury's award is well-founded on evidence.
36 Jumps PSP homebrew - MHUSPEED v3
25 Jumps Sony helping fix Bayonetta for PS3?
22 Jumps PSP homebrew - MacroFire v3.0.12
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
Screw Anascape Ltd. as well as the Texan District Court, you'll never be 1/20000000 as famous as Miyamoto Shigeru will be. And what the heck?! Filling an infringement against Nintendo of America? This is Japanese technology. It's so stupid that the American sector of these Japanese companies always have to take the fall.
I do not know how it works in the US, but Nintendo should take these to higher court if they can.
Now all three console makers have been sued over controllers. Two of them not turning out well for the console makers. I'm sure there might be more cases out there, but these are the ones that stuck out the most in recent times:
-Microsoft and Sony sued for rumble technology in controllers buy Immersion.
-Microsoft settles out of court. Sony battles in court. Because of court battle with Immersion, Rumble was not included in the controller of the PS3 at launch.
-Sony loses court battle and is made to pay damages for the PSone and PS2 Dual Shock controllers and Rumble tech coding found is certain PSone and 2 games. PS3 Dual Shock 3 is released because now they have the blessing of Immersion to use their technology.
And now it Nintendo's turn. It sucks they lost too. Maybe this was one thing both Nintendo and Sony should have followed Microsoft's lead on and just settled. Microsoft is constantly being sued, so they knew nothing good can come from battling certain suits.
They once said Sony losing the Immersion lawsuit is proof all they do is copy, when the truth is Sony has actually innovated more than Nintendo, as Nintendo copies more than anyone else. Everything you think they came up with was done before them by someone else. And usually Nintendo makes things worse than before.
That comment was incredibly retarded, I'm glad Nintendo's being sued, but I think the only fact in your comment there was nintendo was being sued.
Thanks for the laugh
Nah, Nintendo are more money grabbing and idea stealing than both Microsoft and Sony combined.
Plus Miyamoto's a complete jerk off...
I won't argue with you because it's a waste of time... but you can't deny Nintendo is a rich company by now $$. They practically own the handheld sector of videogames with the ds (and even gba), and the Wii pwns both PS3 and 360.
I'm pretty sure Nintendo makes things better ;). They learned with the gc that we don't care about regular consoles when there are too many, so they made a more unique Wii. Guess what? The Wii is selling faster rate than the PS2 did when it came out ;). Nintendo, at least in this case, made things better ;).
And Strife, what you meant to say was:
Nah, Nintendo is more marketing-savy and creative than both Microsoft and Sony combined.
Plus Miyamoto's a complete super star...
That hardly made a dent in their 2.5 billion in profits for the year. Increase the amount I say, Sony paid 95 million for their lawsuit with immersion.
I believe we can blame the Free Trade Agreement for this. I'm not an expert, but from what I've read it appears the FTA opened the floodgates for patent infringement claims in any country a company does business. Perhaps even in countries they don't do business.
The entire patent system is a mess anyway. Some patents are simply ideas that the holders have no intention of ever producing. They hold these for the sole purpose of extorting manufactures who put similar technologies into production. These are called Patent Trolls.
In this day and age, Patents should really be done away with. Seriously, Amazon shouldn't even have a patent on a "One-click" buy option. This concept has been around for a very long time. Want to know who invented it?
http://www.gumballs.com/history.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vending#History
Dude,
What the hell?
You can't honestly believe that companies being sued left and right is in any way good for the gaming industry. These profits you speak of go to pay people's salaries. Not just one person, lots of people. Hundreds of thousands of people who develop the hardware, software, games, and peripherals. People who advertise, sell, ship, and support the first and third party products these companies produce.
If the industry is hurt, who do you really think suffers? Just Nintendo? No. EVERYONE SUFFERS! Everyone, from Iwata to the very last consumer.
Actually, it's the consumers who suffer most. Every legal scuffle is paid for in some part by the consumers who purchase the products. So when you're asking for larger settlements, what you're really saying is that you want to pay more for entertainment.
Want to know who wins from this? The lawyers.
@Xastabus - I couldn't agree more!
"These profits you speak of go to pay people's salaries. Not just one person, lots of people."
He'll never "get it". He doesn't understand these things. He thinks 100% of Nintendo's sales goes right into Miyamoto's pocket.
"Want to know who wins from this? The lawyers."
Bingo! Well, and Anascape, Ltd.
Nintendo is a corporation.
The purpose of a corporation is to make as much money as possible for sharholders.
They will pay their non-CEO employees the minimum they can no matter what, regardless of a "tiny" 21 million lawsuit.
If the company does well, only the shareholders and CEOs benefit.
Do you think they give everyone a raise just because profits are currently high? NO! The CEO gives himself a raise, because he can.
Do YOU get it?
MCS,
I'm not going to argue the fact that corporations are out to make money. If they weren't they wouldn't be in business, they'd be a charity.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure shareholders must vote on raises for the CEO. And while it's true that CEOs typically make ridiculous sums of money, that salary comes with a very heavy burden. The CEO directs the actions of the entire company. If you've watched "Deadliest Catch", the CEO of any company can be equated to the captain of a boat. It's the CEO's directives that guide a company, and if they make a bad decision they could be in danger of ruining the company or loosing their job.
I'm also pretty sure the base workforce is adequately paid for their individual skill level. The video game industry is highly competitive and people with proven talent are highly sought after.
Do you have any idea how much money it takes to develop hardware, software, peripherals, etc.? Millions of dollars. A significant portion of the so called "profits" goes directly into research and development.
When the latest generation of hardware comes out, they can't just sit on their duffs while the cash rolls in. Every developer is currently working on the next "Next Generation" platforms. People are working constantly and getting paid well for their efforts.
Another thing you're missing is third party developers. In no particular order; Ubisoft, Konami, Sierra, Capcom, Majesico, Double Fine, Koei, ect... Hurting the corporations that produce console hardware also hurts these companies as well. The entertainment industry is like a net. You can't realistically attack one knot without damaging the entire structure.
Let me pose you this question. What is your favorite game?
How do you think that game would have been made if the platform it runs on never existed?
I am, of course, assuming you play video games. It would be awfully ridiculous of you to waste your time trolling on Nintendo if you honestly don't even care about the industry.
And now, to close, if you truly believe companies are money grubbing corrupt entities with no regard for consumers, perhaps you should direct your ire toward the petroleum industry. When fuel prices are skyrocketing, it is appalling for the gas industry to be reporting record profits. I guarantee you that the base workforce in the oil world makes significantly less than the base workforce of the video game industry.
Sorry to double post, but I realized I can sum up all of what I just said with the following.
MCS Said:"The purpose of a corporation is to make as much money as possible for sharholders.
They will pay their non-CEO employees the minimum they can no matter what"
No doubt. That's business, like it or loathe it. I'd be willing to bet that no successful business operates any differently.
However, I am curious as to why you are so opposed to Nintendo and, as far as I have noticed, attack nothing else. Could you explain your reason for hating Nintendo so much?
I'm looking for something beyond,
"They're just bad," please.
Xastabus beat me to the punch again!
"They will pay their non-CEO employees the minimum they can no matter what"
WRONG!!!!! Not every Nintendo employee other then the CEO makes only minimum wage.
"The CEO gives himself a raise, because he can."
WRONG!!!!! Just because you're the Chief Executive Officer, that does mean you have FULL control of a company.
As was already stated, a CEO makes mad money because he/she DESERVES mad money. The weight of the company is on their shoulders. Do you think these people jump out of a 4 year college straight to a CEO position? NO! They earned their checks and to have you state otherwise is just plan ignorance.
With great money comes great responsibility. The more you make the more responsibility you have.
Do you "get it" yet?
In regard to the statement,
"They will pay their non-CEO employees the minimum they can no matter what,"
I've decided to take it in a different context. While MCS probably didn't mean it this way, it's still a valid point.
A business will pay it's employees the minimum they can. This is not only subject to minimum wage laws but also to education, experience, and demand for particular skills. So, in reality employees are paid what they are able to negotiate with their employer.
In choosing to view the statement this way I'm trying to point out the fact that skilled workers are paid adequately for their skills.
Slave labor is illegal in most of the world, and I'm pretty sure the highly skilled employees at Nintendo would find better places to work if they weren't being adequately compensated for their skills.
I hear ya! I just don't take anything that knucklehead says seriously.
In this case then the CEO is included in this statement. A company will pay a CEO as little as possible as well. They aren't going to give him "whatever" is left over.
So when viewed in this direction, it's a pointless argument. ALL businesses negotiate 99.99 percent of their cash flow. Otherwise they wouldn't be very profitable.
So either way you go with his comment, it's a moot point.
You're absolutely right, the CEO should be included in that statement.
We're in the spotlight!!!
Forgot to answer one:
"Do you think they give everyone a raise just because profits are currently high?"
It's either excess or nothing with this guy. EVERYONE? No, I doubt EVERYONE would ever get a raise at the same time. Especially not due to sales. After all the parking attendants didn't have much to do with it. At least, I'm fairly sure they didn't. Maybe Nintendo has some pretty high speed parking attendants???
However, would employees from within a specific department get raises or bonuses due to that department having pushed out a successful project? Absolutely. That is certainly believable. The question of the day is, why don't YOU believe it?