Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents

Immersion Sues Sony and Microsoft Over Force Feedback 279

Posted by michael from the putting-a-damper-on-things dept.
stereoroid writes: "Immersion Corp. has filed a lawsuit against Sony and Microsoft, alleging unauthorised use of their patents - here's their press release. The suit alleges that any use of touch or force feedback in their consoles violates their patents. For some obscure reason, this was first reported in the Irish Times today."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Immersion Sues Sony and Microsoft Over Force Feedback More

Immersion Sues Sony and Microsoft Over Force Feedback

Comments Filter:

  • prrt (Score:4, Interesting)

    by KimmoKe ( 267803 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:52AM (#2993612)
    what about all the coin-ops that had force feedback in the 80's
    • I was working for an arcade game company back then, and that was certainly an option for large "motion platform" games. (What about those Battletech simulators? Never tried one myself.)

      But even further back would be the companies that built professional simulators (airplane and otherwise). The idea of giving this patent to a bunch of goofballs who have only been in business since 1993 is a complete joke!

    • Actually, during the Vietnam conflict, the F-4 used a force feedback type system to make up for the fact that the hydraulics would otherwise keep the pilot from getting any feedback about aerodynamic forces on the flight control surfaces. This annoyed some pilots and was sometimes disabled, but the feature was, at least, present. I don't know exactly when it was put in place, but I know it was present, at least, during Vietnam.

      Some aircraft vibrate the stick or the yoke to warn the pilot that the aircraft is close to stalling. Again, I don't know when this practice started, but I don't think it's a new idea.

      There may be other elements to the patent that aren't expressed well in the press release, but the idea of force feedback is not, in itself, novel. Since Vietnam was about 30 years ago, it's difficult to imagine that an idea that was in use in the real world that long ago can be the basis for a current patent claim.

      Adrian

  • not another (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SquierStrat ( 42516 )
    This whole patent mess is getting absolutely ridiculous! Any idiot could have designed the force feedback stuff, even Microsoft! How did that get a patent on something so simple???

    • Re:not another (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Morphine007 ( 207082 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:05AM (#2993697)
      Any idiot could have designed the force feedback stuff, even Microsoft! How did that get a patent on something so simple???

      Once something is invented it's pretty much always simple ref zippers and velcro... that's why there's patent laws; someone is innovative enough to realize that there's a huge potential market for something that's been pretty much staring us in the face for the last umpteen years, so they perfect it, and patent it so that [insert-megalithic-corporation-here] can't screw them outta there rightly deserved cash.

      • Re:not another (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Morphine007 ( 207082 )
        ....it's like if someone were to invent a cold fusion device out of common household materials that so simple that a child of three could put it together, of course it would be patented!!! and we'd probably still get some asshole on /. saying but it's so simple!! anyone could've designed that!! that fscking patent office is on crack!! crack I tell you CRACK!!!...
        dah well.. back to my cave

      • Re:not another (Score:2, Interesting)

        by X.25 ( 255792 )
        Once something is invented it's pretty much always simple ref zippers and velcro...

        The problem is that vast amount of stuff IS INVENTED, but people just don't give a flying f*ck (or don't know) about patenting it.

        A friend of mine modified (some 15 years ago) bloody pinball machine to 'shake' every time bumper was hit. Does it fit into 'force feedback' patent? If he spent some more time with lawyers (and if he lived in the US) he might have patented it and who knows what kind of 'aparatus' that would be today (interpretation, interpretation).

        Similar is the story with 1-click ordering. There were many people who either did it before Amazon or were playing with it, but MANY people (me included) dumped such idea because of a very simple reason - you don't want to store credit card numbers on your server (if you care about security - yours and customer's). It took someone big (Amazon) to do it and ignore security aspects - and they got a patent (at the same time their PR machine managed to convince many people that "it is secure" - bollocks).

        I call it "brute force" ...
      • The problem is that the person who invented the zipper had the idea of using interlocking items on the two sides for months, or even years, ahead of time. That idea is obvious. There were literally hundreds of other manufacturers working on the same idea.

        What the inventor did was figure out the exact shape and composition to make those interlocking things go together, stay together, and not come apart.

        The problem with modern patents is that somebody can go (in software) and in effect patent the idea of making a device that holds the two edges together. They can then spend their idle time working on making the zipper actually work, or just sit on the idea and prevent anybody from inventing the zipper.

    • Simple? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:22AM (#2993771) Journal
      Nothing simple, or easy anyway, about it.

      I suspect that Lockheed probably has prior art, however. Force feedback is fairly standard in fly by wire military aircraft.

    • Re:not another (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Lawyer Entropy.

      The US has too many people training to be lawyers and not enough scientists/engineers. Hence you get lawyers looking for things to do, which means either bog everyone down with brain-dead law-suits or go into corporate america as middle-management. In either case, they are adding no value to the US and we find the country slowing down from the lawyer entropy. If only we could persuade students to follow a math/science/engineering route instead.

      • Re:not another (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Monte ( 48723 )
        If only we could persuade students to follow a math/science/engineering route instead.

        The easiest way to do that would be to make the job less lucrative - the reason people want to be lawyers is because there are so damned many rich ones.

        What we should do is change the laws to (a) put a cap on the amount lawyers can take on contingency, and (b) make the losing side pay the winning side's expenses. I work for a company that provides essentially "lawyer insurance" - we tell our customers that if someone brings a suit against them, even a stupid or trivial suit that they're sure to win, they can spend tens of thousands of dollars to get that "win".

        Of course this will never happen, because so many of the lawmakers are (gulp) - lawyers!

        I do like the term "lawyer entropy". Describes the situation to a T.

  • Heh (Score:4, Funny)

    by Wind_Walker ( 83965 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:55AM (#2993631) Homepage Journal
    In other news...

    ...Logitech is sued by God over the use of "mouse"
    ...Barundi tribes sue every computer user because of their "click" language simulated by keyboard presses
    ..."Patch" Adams, the famous doctor, is suing Microsoft over their use of "Patch"

    And, of course, Microsoft patents 1's and 0's [theonion.com] :-)

    • Nice analogies, too bad they don't match up with the issue at hand. And they don't really make sense.

      Force feedback controllers are mechanical devices, and recent creations. They're precisely what the patent system was created to protect.

  • In other news... (Score:5, Funny)

    by RICE_BOY_TYPE_R ( 556842 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:55AM (#2993632) Homepage
    Today, Immersion technologies filed a separate suit against numerous adult "toy" manufacturers for patent infringements relating to a variety of force feedback mechanisms.

    The suit names the makers of "orgasmatron" and the makers of the "king donger 3000"
    • I thought they were mentioning the popular post 9/11 special edition model... the "star spangled rammer" I better read the legal breifs a bit closer.

    • Heh! I

      came up with the "orgasmatron" when I was in Jr High! It was to be the "mini pocket orgasmatron", essentially a lighter-sized vibrator to sit within one's front pocket(s). Perfect for stealthy fun. It looks like I have a lawsuit to start, money to make!

  • Help me understand... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by eaddict ( 148006 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:55AM (#2993636)
    Why don't these companies come out and sue right away if it such a blatant violation of a patent or something? If I were the judge, I'd say "Well, the feedback stuff has been around for 3 years, you say you have had the patent for 5, why'd did you wait so long? Dismissed" Are IP lawyers like amblance chasers? Are there law firms who do nothing but troll IP patents then alert the holder to a violation (and by the way it will only cost you $$$).
    • Why don't these companies come out and sue right away

      Beacuse once a patent is issued, the burden is on the public to avoid the patents. As you point out, there are law firms / patent search organizations that help companies stay alert to relevant patents. If you don't want to pay those companies, you can do routine searches of your own on the PTO web site.

      There are lots of things broken with the patent process... this isn't one of them.

      • Re:Help me understand... (Score:5, Funny)

        by BlueUnderwear ( 73957 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:16AM (#2993742)
        As you point out, there are law firms [gravenreuth.de] / patent search organizations that help companies stay alert to relevant patents.

        Yeah. In Italy, there are lots of security firms that help restaurant and shop owners stay alert to relevent threats to their physical security...

        If you don't want to pay those companies, you can do routine searches of your own on the PTO web site.

        If you don't want to pay those companies, you can repair the baseball bat damage and put out the fires on your own.

        Most businesses prefer to pay, though.

    • Re:Help me understand... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sofar ( 317980 )
      Apparently Immersion tried to settle with Sony and microsoft in a civilized way and have them as licensees (see their press report!). This is a common way of doing FAIR business legally, and which can take years of legal correspondence.

      Since apparently Sony and Microsoft are still refusing fair negotiations, no other choice of course can be done by immersion.

      Immersion IMHO has been doing a good and fair job here. Now they face all the trouble of lengthy and expensive suits, especially because they are against the 2 toughest players around.

      • Re:Help me understand... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Jace of Fuse! ( 72042 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @12:29PM (#2994479) Homepage
        If they've had the patent for 5 years, Prio Art is going to get them booted out of court.

        It's not like Nintendo didn't release the RUMBLE PACK for the N64 way before any of the other systems had any kind of rumble feature, but as if that weren't enough, Sega's arcade machines have had force beedback since the 80's, as someone else has mentioned.

        I don't know how many times I got annoyed at Hang-On and Outrun because just tapping the edge of the road caused a vibration that caused me to lose even more control which further caused me to wipe out entirely. Of course, that's kind of the point, but it also makes for a more thrilling game and that's why I remember Sega's wonderful Coin-Ops.

        These guys haven't got a case. And even if they did, why haven't they mentioned the Gamecube? Not to mention all the PC Force Feedback controllers.
    • Actually, IP lawyers DO come in the ambulance chaser form factor. There are whole firms that do nothing but comb through patent records looking for something that might possibly apply to some big company. They then go licence the right to sue on behalf of the patent holder, or buy the patent out-right. It's really a slimy business.
    • There are several possible reasons. First and foremost it is not incumbent upon a patent holder to defend it against everyone or even defend it immediately against infringement, it may not be worth their while, for example you breach their patent but they won't care unless you start making enough money to make it worth their while hiring lawyers. One other possible explanation is that they may have already been in discussions with Microsoft and Sony for many months over this, but ultimately couldn't agree on a settlement, filing suit is a clear escalation perhaps because of a breakdown in negotiations. Finally, inside companies not everyone is hawkish about suing people over patent infringements, there is a risk that you'll lose the patent and lawyers can be expensive, and some people are just gun shy or have moral reservations, so when there is an opportunity to sue, it doesn't always happen even when there is an apparently strong case and clear violation, this can delay the decision to sue through internal conflict within senior management.

  • Strange... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:56AM (#2993640)
    I thought Newton would've got all the patents in on force feedback...

  • Another reason why we need patents (Score:3, Insightful)

    by alen ( 225700 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @09:57AM (#2993642)
    A small company designs something and a larger one tries to steal the idea. And yes anyone could have designed it. But immersion put in the time and resources to do it and that's why they should have a monopoly for it for a short time. Otherwise no one would bother to make new things. Why spend time and money on R&D when someone else will just steal the idea and make money of it.
    • In the present companies want to make money, patents are one means of making money and at the same time hindering the competition.

      Companies would still invest the time and money to invent things if patents were removed. It is a fallacy that world needs patents. Companies with stock holders need patents.

      I'm not a radical lefty, I agree a lot with Ayn Rand and economist Ludwig von Mises, I do not agree with the current slanted view that most politicians, business crooks and recent college grads seem to have on what capatilism should be.

      May I be so bold as to suggest you read http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~shadab/ There you might find that there is a theory that capitalism is supposed to benefit the individual not the corporation. To achieve this there must be no regulation of business, Laissez-faire

      What patents do is provide a monoploy, a goverment sanctioned one at that. How can this be in the best interests of anyone but the company holding the patent?
      • My friend, capitalism is NOT where it is at. I'm not saying that capitalism is wrong. I wholly support it. However, I only support capitalism as long as I am perfectly informed. You see, the free market can only prosper when people are perfectly informed.

        That means when a company is going down in the pots and bleeding money like a stuck pig, it can't dump those losses into offshore companies without telling ALL the public. That means when companies decide to go bankrupt, they have to tell the everyone at the same time and let the market make informed decisions.

        Capitalism in it's pure form would require everyone to disclose everything and would result in the greatest loss of privacy since stalin cracked down on political dissidents in his country.

        That's just a theory of course. And not known to be a fact. Discuss!

    • Whatever the merits of this case, I will enjoy M$'s beating. The case is either a valid use of patent law or a spurious attempt to gain a franchise on a general idea. If it's the first, M$ deserves to be beat. If it's the second, M$ deserves to be beat by the laws they helped innovate.

      Someone was good enough to post one of the patents [slashdot.org] involved. It looks fairly specific. It specifies energy storage by a capacitor, and microprocesor control in the handset. Hmmm, a microprocessor for a specific task and a capacitor for energy storage, neither is too new or unique individually. Specifying them together for a determined purpose starts to look like a valid invention. Any invention can be broken down into a combination of general parts that anyone might look at and call obvious. Think of a piece of aluminum sheet, made ridgid by stamping holes and forming the edges, rivited above another sheet which has been formed to recieve it and scored near one end of it. The first sheet when raised by the long end applies pressure to the second sheet that causes it to shear around 90% of the scored shape and bend at the unsheared portion. Yes, that is a pop top. Nothing new about any of the pieces, a leaver, formed sheets, scores. Together, however, they make a new machine that was not obvious to people who have been working metals for six thousand years.

      Then again, it might just be stupid to say that it's unique because the microprocessor and energy storage is in your hand not in the box. If it is possible to abuse the law like that, MicroSoft's contribution has been large. Those that live by the sword, die by the sword. It's even more satisfying to see one of the great sword makers and wielders stuck. Eat you innovation, Microshit.

  • Man... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NiftyNews ( 537829 )
    Doesn't this (and the linking patent) fall under some sort of Abandonment law? I thought that there was some rule where you had to seek action within X number of years once you had knowledge of an infringement and once that time frame ran out you lost your patent rights based on abandonment...IINAL of course, so a reply from one would likely be handy.
    • knowledge of an infringement and once that time frame ran out you lost your patent rights

      Problem is, it takes a long while to actually get a patent, it takes time to find the violators, it takes alot of effort to figure out exactly how a competitor is violating, and then it takes time to write up the complaint. Further, you don't really want to sue unless you can recover damages; so you would be prudent to only sue companies that you can recover damages from (or patent enforcement becomes a money sink into enforcement suits that don't pay for themselves).

      As for abandonment... this only happens if you don't pay the renewal fees every so years.

  • Interesting... (Score:2, Informative)

    by big_groo ( 237634 )
    ...that Nintendo isn't mentioned. Is it perhaps that Nintendo calls it "Rumble" instead of "force-feedback"?

    • Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Informative)

      by sh00z ( 206503 )
      Wow. A /. reader who doesn't play video games? They're simply not the same thing. "Rumble" is just a bigger version of the off-center disc used to vibrate pagers. So, if you drive your MarioKart off the road, the wheel will start to shake. Force, or haptic, feedback, will impart a restoring force to a steering wheel greater than that of the return spring alone. It's best in flight sims, where if you try some particularly tricky maneuvers, it requires a great deal of force to get the control surfaces where you want them.

  • Irish Times (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kzinti ( 9651 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:01AM (#2993665) Homepage Journal
    For some obscure reason, this was first reported in the Irish Times today.

    You mean because the Times scooped their competition? What's so unusual about that? Because it's not a US paper? Not all tech-savvy newspapers are located in the States, you know. Ireland has a thriving tech industry, so it's not all that surprising that they break a tech story now and again.

    --Jim

  • Which patents? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Neon Spiral Injector ( 21234 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:01AM (#2993668)
    I didn't see the exact patent numbers that were supposedly infringed on. Looking at Immersion's patents, it seems they are for real force feedback. Like making a controller harder to push when you are up against a wall. Not the nerve killing vibrations of the current console controllers. Microsoft did make a true force feedback joystick for the PC though.

    Well it isn't a software patent, and the suit is against two big corps we love to hate. But if they are claiming a patent on a vibrating controller, I think there may be prior art.

    Oh, one more thing. What happens with companines like Logitech (who also made a true force feedback joystick) that licensed the technology, if the patent is declared invalid. Can they sue for the license fees that they paid?
    • I have a logitech Force Feedback Joystick sitting right in front of me, I wonder if that applies to? Although they don't seem to have mentioned them.

      I just browsed through all their patents, and it seems like any force feedback technology applied here; but I still fail to see how anything having to do with Xbox or Playstation comes in to play here.

    • if the patent is declared invalid. Can they sue for the license fees that they paid?

      There's usually a "no refunds if patent invalidated" clause in the licensing agreement.

  • Prior Art (Score:5, Funny)

    by jordan_a ( 139457 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:02AM (#2993674)
    Clearly I have prior art claims, since when I was 11 or so my friends and I would take turns hitting each other while we played with our Atari.

  • My fav (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cowscows ( 103644 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:06AM (#2993699) Journal
    My favorite from a quick glance over their patents is number 80 on their list.
    "Implementing Force Feedback Over the World Wide Web and Other Computer Networks ". Taking a fairly common feature, and saying it can work over a network. Any network. A quick skim through the patent listing didn't have any reference to a specific unique protocol or anything that they designed.

    Are they talking about realtime streaming of force feedback data? Are they talking about embedding that stuff in webpages? If I have my computer shake my mouse a little bit every time an FTP connection fails, can they sue me? It makes no sense.

    • Re:My fav (Score:4, Funny)

      by Neon Spiral Injector ( 21234 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:35AM (#2993832)
      It does seem that trend with patents is take some existing technology and "web enable" it. The other technique for coming up with new patents is to tie it to a database.

      Ooo, looking over thier list it doesn't seem they have a patent on "Force feedback with a database backend." I call dibs.
    • It would seem to me they're talking about computer games or other interactive applications. Just making sure your average flight-sim Java applet or Flash thingie can't use some unauthorized force-feedback device.

      You shoot someone, the message is received through the network, and the appropiate force-feedback response is applied in the other player's computer.

      I don't think the mouse-shake is within their patent anymore than the use of the "you got mail!" is within Dolby's patents.

      Not that it isn't ridiculously vague and pointless. It just isn't as ridiculously vague and pointless as what you describe.
    • The Black and White [bwgame.com] website is force-feedback enabled, if you've got a shakeymouse.
  • Here's the link to the original article, as it's not on the front page any more. Not much to it really

    Firm sues Microsoft, Sony over joystick vibration [ireland.com]
  • I got myself one of those Logitech Mouseman iFeel immersion-technology mouses. It's ridiculous. It even plays music. Yes, the mouse plays music, resembling the floppy drive music back in 80's, you can play tunes on it by adjusting the vibration, en the default drivers does just that.

    It feels like you're holding a shaver, not like you could feel the icons on your desktop or anything like that.
  • "Based on the Greek word, "haptesthai," meaning touch, haptic technology enables people to feel touch sensations while interacting with a digital display, like a computer screen and a hardware device such as a joystick or mouse."

    kinda like masturbating your computer....

  • Let them sue... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by L-Wave ( 515413 )
    Let them sue sony and microsoft, in the end can't they (IMMERSION) be held liable for hand injuries? Hand injury due to vibrating controllers [slashdot.org]
    • Probably not. First off, there are actually warnings in the manual about prolonged use of the vibrating controllers. Secondly, I don't think they can be held liable if they didn't manufacture the product themselves. They just license the technology, so they can't be accountable for somebody else building one that shakes too hard, or what-not. And even if they were liable for it, the controllers that caused the injuries may not have been licensed (this [bbc.co.uk] article doesn't say what console the child was using, though the console in the picture looks like a dreamcast)
  • And In Next Weeks News. Microsofts Hostile Takeover of Immersion Corp

    then the following weeks news:

    Microsoft Files Suit Against Sony Computer Entertainment for Patent Infingement
  • Immersion, upon winning a lawsuit regarding force feedback, finds itself the target of a MASSIVE class action lawsuit after a Slashdot article [slashdot.org] brought this stirring subject to the attention of soccer moms and disco dads all across the world.

  • There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:4, Informative)

    by asmithmd1 ( 239950 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:12AM (#2993726) Homepage Journal
    They filed this in March of 1996, I know I played Atari Pole Position which had force feedback steering before I could drive a car, that would make it 1983

    5,691,898 November 25, 1997 Safe and low cost computer peripherals with force feedback for consumer applications Abstract A method and apparatus for providing safe and low-cost force feedback peripherals for consumer applications. A device microprocessor local to an interface device is coupled to the host by a first interface bus. The microprocessor receives host commands from the host computer on the first interface bus, such as an RS-232 interface, and commands an actuator to apply a force to a user object, such as a joystick, in response to host commands. A sensor detects positions of the user object and outputs signals to the host on a second interface bus, such as a PC game port bus, separate from the first bus. In a "recoil" embodiment, a user initiates force feedback by pressing a button on the joystick, which sends an activation signal to the actuator. In other recoil embodiments, the host computer can transmit one or more enable signals and/or activation signals to the actuator to enable or command forces. A safety switch of the present invention disables the actuator when the interface device is not in use and enables the actuator when an amount of weight over a predetermined amount is placed on the joystick created by a user grasping the joystick. A circuit of the present invention includes a capacitor for storing power provided by an input signal and supplied to the actuator when forces are to be output.


  • the actual story as posted on the irish times is here:
    http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2002/0 21 2/breaking6.htm

    Its a syndicated story, the 'PA' at the bottom is for the Press Association a Uk news service.
    I supect the 'breaking news' section is an entirely automated newsfeed, which would explain why the Irish Times had it posted at 6 in the morning (GMT, their local time).

  • Prior Art - "Fly by Wire" Aircraft (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dso ( 9793 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:16AM (#2993744) Homepage
    As early as the 1950's military aircraft were using force feedback so the pilots could "feel" the plane. Fly by wire was just not intuitive without the feedback part. The first plane that I know used this was the Avro Arrow.

  • Let them win... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Krimsen ( 26685 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:20AM (#2993764)
    Hey, let them win... then they can be sued by all the users that develop hand-arm vibration syndrome [slashdot.org]
  • Everyone knows the first known version of forced feedback is the Vulcan mind meld!

    "Give me your thoughts! GIVE ME YOUR THOUGHTS!!!"

  • Noam Slashdot :o (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jeff13 ( 255285 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:25AM (#2993785) Homepage
    "For some obscure reason, this was first reported in the Irish Times today.""
    Why, oh why, doesn't Slashdot post my submitions? Europe has been buzzing with this and other patent cases involving Microsoft. Microsoft recently failed to pay the measly $600,000 to the poor french couple who sold everything they have to fight for thier rights against Microsoft. They won! But Slahsdot doesn't report these things when I, a long time and loyal reader, submit.

    It's the Softimage case morons.

    • Re:Noam Slashdot :o (Score:2, Interesting)

      by nomadic ( 141991 )
      You have a link for that French story? Sounds interesting...

      Apparently they pick submissions pretty much at random. And despite their complaining that they have to sift through hundreds of stories a day, they seem to reject mine a few minutes after I submit them.

    • Re:Noam Slashdot :o (Score:4, Informative)

      by cruelworld ( 21187 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @01:13PM (#2994793)
      for more details see here. [infosatellite.com]

      Or just use google. Like normal people do.

  • This technology is 100 years old! (Score:5, Informative)

    by clintp ( 5169 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:27AM (#2993803)
    The technology for arcade games to have physical feedback to the user is well over 100 years old.

    Go to an antique arcade (here's one [marvin3m.com]) and look around a bit. There's machines that use electrical stimulation (low-voltage applied across the handles) and machines that use mechanical feedback (vibration, pulling, pushing). Many of these machines date from the 19th century.

    There's nothing *new* about this at all.

  • They aren't really funny anymore. My question is, wouldn't a patent have to be for a specific method of making the controller vibrate? I mean, there's a reason that you can buy different products that do the same thing in this world. Patent only stops someone from taking things apart and using the exact same method for accomplishing the task.


    Or maybe I don't understand patents, but this could just be them hoping to get a little kick back from a few big companies.

    • No, the patent wouldn't be for the specific method - this is the difference between good patent agents and poor ones.

      In UK patents (US ones differ from this) there will be multiple claims for the invention, with claim 1 being the one which is the basic invention, and subsequent claims being addenda to this claim. So, for example, in this case claim 1 might be "A mechanism for transmitting a vibrating sensation to a games user", and claim 2 might be "A mechanism as in claim 1 where the sensation is created by rotating an eccentrically mounted mass" etc.

      So often a patent will be filed (and later granted) with a single main claim, and literally dozens of further claims to narrow the thing down - this is done to stop somebody else patenting the more specific version, and essentially locking you out from your own invention.

      Note that US patents are different in that there *may* be multiple fundamental claims in a single patent - as in the BT hyperlink patent we were discussing earlier.

      Dunstan
  • its that they are issuing bad patents due to bad laws and bad examiners and bad budgeting for the patent office. Reduce the life to 5 years from issue, and start denying software and business process patents as a default action. Another idea would be to post all patent applications to the internet for comment for 180 days before approval. Prior art would show up in a hurry for things like the BT patent and probably this one as well.

  • *sigh* More case for Patent Reform (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Spuggy ( 69103 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @10:35AM (#2993829) Homepage
    I really don't Immersion is to blame on this one. If the patent office was stupid enough to award the Patent to them without checking for prior art, than it's still something that Microsoft and Sony are bound to recognize.

    I remember when the Dual Shock Controller first came out for the PSX and how I was sure to buy one quick because everything I read pointed to a quick removal from the market for a patent infringement.

    To Immersion's Defense, they did try to work with MS and Sony to work out a licensing agreement for the technology. I can't imagine that their asking price was that unreasonable seeing as though I had to pay $35 for a PS2 Dual Shock and $40 for the XBox controller.

    [From the Article]
    Immersion has expanded its licensees into the gaming console market with partners such as MadCatz, Saitek and others

    This would indicate to me that other vendors have licensed Immersion's Technology. They sell their products a substantially cheaper price and in many cases are not an inferior product. I find it hard to believe that Sony and MS could not afford to pay this.

    This is another case in which the Patent Office has screwed up again. If, as many of these other posts indicate there was prior art to the Force Feedback, then the Patent Office is to blame for awarding this in the first place. Immersion is simply excersing a right they have as patent holder--they are not to blame in this.
    • I want to know what your proposals are for reform? How thorough should the USPTO be when investigating patents?

      The USPTO employs around 5,000 full time staff which equates to around 10 million man hours (8 hour days, 250 work days). In 2000 there were over 315,000 patent applications. That would come to about 31 hours per application (assuming that all employees were researching patents which they aren't).

      In that time they would have to read and understand the very technical document, evaluate that it qualifies for a patent in the first place (not too obvious or too broad), and check to make sure that it isn't already patented. You want to add looking the world over for what they deem to be previous art?

      To me, the burden rests on the company applying for the patent to find previous art. They are the ones who will waste time and money applying and receiving a patent just to have it overturned in court.

      I also believe that the Justice Department is the right group to be making the final decision on patents. The US was built on checks and balances. This is why we have three branches of government. I think it would be dangerous to put that much power in the hands of the USPTO.
  • My guess is that they filed this suit to drum up publicity for their technology; if you think of every hit against their webpage as a targeted advertisement striking a potential techie customer (slashdotters, no less! Raise your hand if you've bought something stupid in the last year), well, it becomes very cost effective.

    Not (Paranoid -> Not (After You))
  • What if Immersion wins this court case and receives full recognition for holding this patent? Does that mean all the kids who played their PS2's and Xboxes too long will be able to sue them for the damage to their wrists [slashdot.org] as well?

  • Military simulators? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by X.25 ( 255792 )
    How could they hold a patent on thing that has been used for decades in military air simulators, and for at least 15 years in arcade machines?

    Additionaly, it was my understanding that X-Box and PS1/2 are using 'vibrating' technology, as opposed to 'force feedback' technology. It would make sense if M$ is sued because of their joysticks, but suing them for 'vibrator'? What's next - sex shops will go out of business because of patent infrigement?
  • No offense to you guys who claim that "Immersion spends tons of time and money" on developing the science for the patents, but the patents simply don't go past the point of "concept".... There's a patent there, #5,844,392 , that is NOTHING MORE than a blatant rip-off of the VR database browser from 1994's movie Disclosure (which is itself based on the Michael Crichton book, but I doubt these guys read it.... they were probably too busy inventing the concept of a network of computers conneccted to each other and spanning the world).
  • I looked at their site and they list at least 117 distinct patents. Does anyone know exactly which are in dispute?

  • Prior Art... (Score:2, Informative)

    by thelizman ( 304517 )
    ...can be claimed by the US military and/or it's contractors since aircraft have been using force feedback systems since WWII, and their useage of Multifunction Tactile Manipulatable Controls and Velocity Controller with Force Feedback Stiffness Controls have been in use since the space programs Apollo, the X-15, and in production since the F-15.
  • I don't know the names of specific games, but I swear as a kid there used to be all sorts of games at the arcades with this tech. Mostly I remember driving games that you sit in where the seat vibrates when you crash and such? Anybody else know more about this than I do, or am I dreaming?

  • Prior use (Score:2, Informative)

    by njdj ( 458173 )
    Could someone summarize what Immersion's patent really covers?
    Prior use of force feedback in computer control systems goes back at least 35 years. In the 1970s, CERN developed a control system for a synchrotron which used it. The operator could control many currents and voltages using a small number of knobs (which you turned like volume controls). First you had to tell the computer to assign a knob to the desired quantity to be controlled, then you twiddled the knob.
    Where the force feedback came in, was that the control system made the knob "stiffer" to turn if you were using it to control a large amount of current (hundreds of amperes) than if you were using it to control tiny currents (milliamperes). This was found to reduce the likelihood of damaging blunders.
  • This is a snippet from a user's post under today's story about the hearings over the future of IP:

    Whens it going to end? Capitalism is fine, but too much of anything is bad. When will people figure out, too much capitalism, too much competition, and not enough sharing is bad? Yes moderate competition fuels innovation, too much competition however makes the enviornment so competitive that no one can innovate.

    Imagine the innovation and the new technologies we'd have, if third world countries had access to all the information in the world, and any kid rich or poor could be the next einstien or bill gates, any living person, any of the 6 billion people could come out with an idea, which changes the world and shares the idea for free.

    So now who are we (Slashdot) gonna support in this issue? A patent which is always bad (EVIL! EVIL!) or are we going to side with Microsoft's right to innovate, as expressed (indirectly) by the quote above? Is it possible that all pantents aren't bad? Or is it possible that not everything Microsoft does is bad? Hmm.....

  • Many years ago this was a thriving, happy planet - people, cities, shops, a normal world. Except that on the high streets of these cities there were slightly more law firms than one might have thought necessary. And slowly, insidiously, the number of the law firms were increasing. It's a well-known economic phenomenon but tragic to see it in operation, for the more law firms there were, the more lawsuits they had to make and the worse and more unrealistic they became. And the worse they were to defend against, the more people had to pay to keep themselves in business, and the more the law firms proliferated, until the whole economy of the place passed what I believe is termed the Lawsuit Event Horizon, and it became no longer economically possible to do anything other than make lawsuits. Result - collapse, ruin and famine. Most of the population died out. Those few who had the right kind of genetic instability mutated into birds who cursed their feet, cursed the ground and vowed that no one should walk on it again.

    Paraphrased from "Restaurant at the End of the Universe" by Douglas Adams - originally not about Earth but about shoe shops on Frogstar B.

    Kjella

  • Obscure is right (Score:3, Funny)

    by sharkey ( 16670 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2002 @11:42PM (#2998261)
    For some obscure reason, this was first reported in the Irish Times today.

    I couldn't find any references to potatoes OR alcohol. Why are the Irish interested?

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close