Immersion Sues Sony and Microsoft Over Force Feedback 279
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."
prrt (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:prrt (Score:2)
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!
Re:prrt (Score:2)
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)
Re:not another (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
dah well.. back to my cave
Re:not another (Score:2, Interesting)
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"
Re:not another (Score:2)
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)
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)
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)
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)
...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] :-)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
Force feedback controllers are mechanical devices, and recent creations. They're precisely what the patent system was created to protect.
Re:Heh (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
The suit names the makers of "orgasmatron" and the makers of the "king donger 3000"
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
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)
Re:Help me understand... (Score:2)
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)
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)
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)
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.
Re:Help me understand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Help me understand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Strange... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Strange... (Score:3, Funny)
Oh wait, that was the FORCE feedback...
Re:Strange... (Score:2)
Wait, does that mean that the DualShock2 technology is midichlorian-based?
Re:Strange... (Score:3, Funny)
I'll get me coat.
Another reason why we need patents (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Another reason why we need patents (Score:3, Interesting)
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?
Re:Another reason why we need patents (Score:2)
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!
another idiot's view (Score:2)
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.
Re:another idiot's view (Score:2)
Man... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Man... (Score:2)
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)
Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Interesting... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
There are haptic devices for the Sony consoles, but I don't think any of them are made or endorsed by Sony except Logitech's.
And MS does make some damn fine input devices...Haptic or otherwise!
GTRacer
- If I play with my MS 'balls all day, who goes blind - me or the PC?
Irish Times (Score:3, Insightful)
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
Re:Irish Times (Score:3, Informative)
Just you're average nitpicker.
The Celtic Tiger (Score:2)
Re:Irish Times (Score:2)
Which patents? (Score:5, Interesting)
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?
Re:Which patents? (Score:2)
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.
Probably not (Score:2)
There's usually a "no refunds if patent invalidated" clause in the licensing agreement.
Prior Art (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Prior Art (Score:5, Funny)
My fav (Score:5, Interesting)
"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)
Ooo, looking over thier list it doesn't seem they have a patent on "Force feedback with a database backend." I call dibs.
Re:My fav (Score:2)
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.
Re:My fav (Score:2)
The Irish Times Article (Score:2, Informative)
Firm sues Microsoft, Sony over joystick vibration [ireland.com]
Immersion technology mouses are a joke (Score:2, Interesting)
It feels like you're holding a shaver, not like you could feel the icons on your desktop or anything like that.
hrmmm.... (Score:2)
kinda like masturbating your computer....
Let them sue... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Let them sue... (Score:2)
next weeks news... (Score:2, Funny)
then the following weeks news:
Microsoft Files Suit Against Sony Computer Entertainment for Patent Infingement
In Future news: (Score:2)
There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:2)
All these old arcade force feedback systems haven't had their own cpu to controll the force feedback and didn't use some sort of command based interface over some interface bus like RS232 or USB.
Very likely their interface was just a bunch of TTL logic connected to the main bus.
Re:There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:2)
Re:There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:2)
Re:There has got to be prior art for this patent (Score:2)
as reported by the irish times (Score:2, Informative)
the actual story as posted on the irish times is here:
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2002/
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)
Re:Prior Art - "Fly by Wire" Aircraft (Score:2, Insightful)
Let them win... (Score:5, Funny)
You want force feedback...!!! (Score:2)
"Give me your thoughts! GIVE ME YOUR THOUGHTS!!!"
Noam Slashdot :o (Score:5, Interesting)
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)
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:2)
Woo, what do I win?
Let me guess, another 2 mods down!
Re:Noam Slashdot :o (Score:4, Informative)
Or just use google. Like normal people do.
This technology is 100 years old! (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Well, lets get past all the "in other news" jokes. (Score:2)
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.
Re:Well, lets get past all the "in other news" jok (Score:2)
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
The problem isnt that patents are bad (Score:2, Insightful)
*sigh* More case for Patent Reform (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:*sigh* More case for Patent Reform (Score:2)
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.
Re: Patent Reform (Score:2)
Patents are important especially in a capitalist society. Without patents, companies would have no incentive to invest in R&D. Let's just say that you are a company and have just spent $10 million in research and you can't patent your idea, your competitor has a significant advantage in that they can duplicate your idea with the only cost being manufacturing.
I don't think this is as frivolous as a business model patent (like the ones Amazon have). There is a product and a technology behind it. It's not just an idea.
Publicity Stunt? (Score:2)
Not (Paranoid -> Not (After You))
What If They Win? (Score:2)
Military simulators? (Score:2, Insightful)
Additionaly, it was my understanding that X-Box and PS1/2 are using 'vibrating' technology, as opposed to 'force feedback' technology. It would make sense if M$ 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?
Just try reading their website's patent page... (Score:2)
which patents? (Score:2)
Prior Art... (Score:2, Informative)
Arcade games prior art? (Score:2)
Prior use (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Uh oh... Dillema anyone? (Score:2)
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.....
What will be Earth's entry in Hitchhiker's Guide.. (Score:2)
Paraphrased from "Restaurant at the End of the Universe" by Douglas Adams - originally not about Earth but about shoe shops on Frogstar B.
Kjella
Re:What will be Earth's entry in Hitchhiker's Guid (Score:2)
Obscure is right (Score:3, Funny)
I couldn't find any references to potatoes OR alcohol. Why are the Irish interested?
Re:Isn't is so.. (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is everyone on slashdot is so conditioned to react negatively to any patent claim that they'll jump to the attack, even when it's unwarranted.
This is exactly what the patent office was created for.
Re:Isn't is so.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but there are two points here:
1) They were NOT the first to come up with this. Loads of arcade games for instance have been using forced-feedback for many, many years.
2) This patent is far too broad, and should have never been granted. How can you patent the concept of vibration?! I could see if they patented a certain type of motor that produced a specific form of vibration, and Sony & MS stole the plans, but they are suing because their controllers vibrate. As much as I dislike Sony & MS, this lawsuit is BS.
I do wonder though. If Immersion wins, can the child in this story [slashdot.org] sue them instead of Sony??
Re:Isn't is so.. (Score:2)
That's why I prefaced my comment with an "if they were the first ones". The posters here seem to be criticizing the idea of patenting this kind of device, which I think is a little silly. This is absolutely nothing like BT's attempt to patent hyperlinks, and there's no basis for drawing an analogy. If there's prior art that's an entirely different criticism.
2) This patent is far too broad, and should have never been granted. How can you patent the concept of vibration?! I could see if they patented a certain type of motor that produced a specific form of vibration, and Sony & MS stole the plans, but they are suing because their controllers vibrate. As much as I dislike Sony & MS, this lawsuit is BS.
It's actually a very precisely worded patent: Doesn't sound vague to me.
Re:Isn't is so.. (Score:2)
How would we be stuffed? Can you find a single appliance in your house that isn't patented? Did that prevent their adoption?
Re:3 question .... (Score:2)
2) That would merely result in a settlement because Sony can't use their portfolio to to prevent a suit, all they can do is sue for infringement themselves.
3) Ever thought that Nintendo was a licensee? MadCatz and several other game console products vendors seem to be licensees.
Re:Suicide (Score:2)
Re:Power steering? (Score:2)