[General Discussion] The courts fuck Sony over (I sent them a thank-you note)

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/03/13/so...ock-uncertain/

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.


Which is worse? Stealing technology and making millions of dollars off the theft, or bribing someone to lie in court so you don't have to pay even a portion of that money back to the rightful owner?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

This case is pretty old. The company sued both Microsoft and Sony for "stealing" their rumble device, but Microsoft settled with Immersion out of court and bought a nice portion of their stock. Sony, arrogant as usual, fought on. So not only did they steal the rumble technology, but they also bribed their witness. Without the bribery, Sony may have been able to get away with this case....

My point being, when will Sony learn to stop playing cheap tricks? Graffiti ads aren't very smart either, but...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Grawl

You know that other companies using the rumble-function too. Did they get sued?

Only Microsoft and Sony were sued. Nintendo apparently made their own rumble feature instead of "stealing" it (I don't know how accurate the claim was, but Sony...). Microsoft, as I said, settled out of court, but Sony chose to go on... and bribed their witness.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.