The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
So Microsoft, who settled with Immersion back in 2003(lol sony?) on the use of the force feedback is now suing them right back, claiming breach of contract.
This just goes to show you why you shouldn't screw with Microsoft's legal team...
MS's original settlement was for $26 million, and they're now claiming to be owed $27.5 mil due to the money Sony paid Immersion... if they win (and a cursory reading of the blog linked in the article suggests that they have a very good case), MS will get paid 1.5 mil for doing nothing but licensing it first
So Microsoft, who settled with Immersion back in 2003(lol sony?) on the use of the force feedback is now suing them right back, claiming breach of contract.
I don't usually say this, but good for Microsoft. Immersion squatted on that patent, and got a lot of money from it. Hopefully they get thiers now.
EDIT: yes, I know how to spell article. e's are not that important anyway.
Have I missed something. I was lead to believe that Immersion is an industry leader in force feedback devices, they actually build items based on their patents. As far as I'm aware they hardly squatted on the patent, suing less than a year (I think after the second of the two patents had been awarded. The only dodgy thing is the filing of the first patent (which the two patents that were infringed are based upon) happened after the dual shock was first released in Japan, I don't know how the US apptent system works in terms of first to file/first to invent.
I think it's a bot of a stretch about how they've gone from the full body stimualting devices of the patents down to joypads but the patent does describe exactly how the Dualshock and Microsoft pads produce their rumble.
This just goes to show you why you shouldn't screw with Microsoft's legal team...
MS's original settlement was for $26 million, and they're now claiming to be owed $27.5 mil due to the money Sony paid Immersion... if they win (and a cursory reading of the blog linked in the article suggests that they have a very good case), MS will get paid 1.5 mil for doing nothing but licensing it first
I would think it depends on how much of Immersion they own. I mean, if they own only 5% of the company, then I would think they are only entitled to 5% of the Sony money, which would be a little over $4.5mil.
Ever since that whole McDonald's coffee fiasco everyone is cashing in on this suing business.
That topic generated about 25 pages of discussion in D&D. Long story short, McDonald's was in the wrong on that one. They made the coffee too hot to mask its terrible flavor. If it was just a few degrees cooler it wouldn't, you know, scald human flesh.
I dont think it could be to do with giving Sony rumble. If MS went out of their way to prevent a competitor using technology like rumble then I'm pretty sure that would not be considered a valid business practice.
I dont think it could be to do with giving Sony rumble. If MS went out of their way to prevent a competitor using technology like rumble then I'm pretty sure that would not be considered a valid business practice.
Im sorry are you and I talking about the same Microsoft?
I dont think it could be to do with giving Sony rumble. If MS went out of their way to prevent a competitor using technology like rumble then I'm pretty sure that would not be considered a valid business practice.
Im sorry are you and I talking about the same Microsoft?
Yeah but didn't they get sued last time they tried to create monopolies and use their influence to fuck over competitors?
Update 10:00 p.m.: Todd Bishop at the Seattle P-I has done some good digging to get at the heart of the dispute using court and regulatory filings. It appears Microsoft had a clause that it stood to get payments if Immersion and Sony settled. Sony and Immersion reached an arrangement, but Microsoft and Immersion dispute the implications of that.
I dont think it could be to do with giving Sony rumble. If MS went out of their way to prevent a competitor using technology like rumble then I'm pretty sure that would not be considered a valid business practice.
Im sorry are you and I talking about the same Microsoft?
Yeah but didn't they get sued last time they tried to create monopolies and use their influence to fuck over competitors?
That's more or less gone away. There was a NY Times article a week or so ago about how all antitrust legislation against Microsoft has been sorta...blocked? by the Bush administration. I just basically saw the headlines and never got to read the article, but my gut instinct tells me that they don't care about that right now.
And, really, it's not monopolistic, at least in my opinion, to enforce a valid piece of their contractual agreement with Immersion. This is clearly Immersion and Sony tittering to each other saying "hey, let's word this so it doesn't sound like a settlement." It's a settlement, and no matter what Microsoft's actual motive is, Immersion should pay up.
Still, I don't think this has to do with Microsoft wanting to block Sony from getting force feedback for the PS3. I think this is more an act of spite. The funniest part of this whole thing is that Sony would have to pay a 25 cent royalty to Microsoft for each game sold. I wouldn't even give a fuck about the 27.5 mil. I'd just collect the quarters and fashion a gigantic piggybank. Maybe a vault. Like Scrooge McDuck. And I'd swim around in it. Oh yes. I would.
Alot of it also has to do with the fact that Microsoft settling with Immersion created a precedent which would have strengthened Immersions case against Sony. In effect Microsoft settled with Immersion to help them win against Sony and part of the deal was they get some of the plunder / settlement.
Update 10:00 p.m.: Todd Bishop at the Seattle P-I has done some good digging to get at the heart of the dispute using court and regulatory filings. It appears Microsoft had a clause that it stood to get payments if Immersion and Sony settled. Sony and Immersion reached an arrangement, but Microsoft and Immersion dispute the implications of that.
Nice.
Well isn't that interesting. Nice little clause MS has. I wonder if that will actually stand up in court.
Posts
I'M A TWITTER SHITTER
Fucking thing. I made it sign a "No stubbing" clause just 4 months ago.
I am going to be such a millionaire.
Microsoft sues a company thatthey are part owner of, and then takes the liberty of choosing horrible lawyers for the other company.
I prodict that thefuture of corporate america will be monopolies suingthemselves, afterthere is no one else left to sue
In some six degrees of kevin bacon way?
Have a banana, you're winner.
Steam | XBL
MS's original settlement was for $26 million, and they're now claiming to be owed $27.5 mil due to the money Sony paid Immersion... if they win (and a cursory reading of the blog linked in the article suggests that they have a very good case), MS will get paid 1.5 mil for doing nothing but licensing it first
Have I missed something. I was lead to believe that Immersion is an industry leader in force feedback devices, they actually build items based on their patents. As far as I'm aware they hardly squatted on the patent, suing less than a year (I think after the second of the two patents had been awarded. The only dodgy thing is the filing of the first patent (which the two patents that were infringed are based upon) happened after the dual shock was first released in Japan, I don't know how the US apptent system works in terms of first to file/first to invent.
I think it's a bot of a stretch about how they've gone from the full body stimualting devices of the patents down to joypads but the patent does describe exactly how the Dualshock and Microsoft pads produce their rumble.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
I would think it depends on how much of Immersion they own. I mean, if they own only 5% of the company, then I would think they are only entitled to 5% of the Sony money, which would be a little over $4.5mil.
Did you ever see roadlawyers?
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
Im sorry are you and I talking about the same Microsoft?
Yeah but didn't they get sued last time they tried to create monopolies and use their influence to fuck over competitors?
Nice.
That's more or less gone away. There was a NY Times article a week or so ago about how all antitrust legislation against Microsoft has been sorta...blocked? by the Bush administration. I just basically saw the headlines and never got to read the article, but my gut instinct tells me that they don't care about that right now.
And, really, it's not monopolistic, at least in my opinion, to enforce a valid piece of their contractual agreement with Immersion. This is clearly Immersion and Sony tittering to each other saying "hey, let's word this so it doesn't sound like a settlement." It's a settlement, and no matter what Microsoft's actual motive is, Immersion should pay up.
Still, I don't think this has to do with Microsoft wanting to block Sony from getting force feedback for the PS3. I think this is more an act of spite. The funniest part of this whole thing is that Sony would have to pay a 25 cent royalty to Microsoft for each game sold. I wouldn't even give a fuck about the 27.5 mil. I'd just collect the quarters and fashion a gigantic piggybank. Maybe a vault. Like Scrooge McDuck. And I'd swim around in it. Oh yes. I would.
MWO: Adamski
Well isn't that interesting. Nice little clause MS has. I wonder if that will actually stand up in court.