Sony's appeal denied; fate of dualshock uncertain [Update 1]
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.
[Update: clarified Microsoft's "settlement" and fixed a plethora of typographical errors that should never have made it published. Sorry about that.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Evilsmevil @ Mar 13th 2006 3:07PM
Microsoft didnt actually settle, instead they bought Immersion thereby solving the problem of paying license fees. This means that Sony will in effect be paying money to Microsoft for every Dual Shock that they sell... (assuming that they aggree to license the technology).
teknomusik @ Mar 13th 2006 3:09PM
Ha-ha!
LunarDuality @ Mar 13th 2006 3:10PM
Does this mean that Sony might actually have to pay for the IP crimes it committed? Or can they file further appeals. I find it atrocious that they have continued to be able to sell their products despite being repeatedly rebuffed by the legal system. I hope Immersion finally gets their money.
And isn't it sad that MS seems to have taken the "sane" route by settling out of court for much less money *and* rights to use the tech in future projects (i.e. the Xbox 360 Controller)? A strange world we live in.
LunarDuality @ Mar 13th 2006 3:11PM
Actually, they did "settle" but the settlement was for $26 million and did include a "stake" in the company.
http://news.com.com/Microsoft+settles+suit+with+Immersion/2100-1041_3-5056455.html
Thomas Crymes @ Mar 13th 2006 3:12PM
Wow. Just. Wow.
If Sony has to pull consoles and suspend the selling of certain games, there will be much gnashing of teeth.
Why does it seem that Sony is a thousand times more pompous than M$ (and M$ is pretty damn pompous)? They stole that guy's idea for the walkman (then had to pay him years later for the theft after counter suing him and nearly making him homeless). The whole rootkit thing. Now this.
Now the question is... what evil has Nintendo committed? I'm guessing they are not squeaky clean. I don't know of many (any) large companies without skeletons in their closet.
Josh Warner @ Mar 13th 2006 3:14PM
While I am in no way a Sony fan (www.iheartrootkit.com anyone?), I have to side with them on this one.
This is an excellent example of how ridiculous "intellectual property" law has become. Seriously, Immersion is trying to claim that they (and ONLY they) have the rights to technology involving a non-symmetric mass rotating? Have any judges ever taken a single physics course? It's based on concepts from freaking NEWTONIAN physics that are centuries old - prior art here should be trivial to establish.
If your car tires are unbalanced and setting up a vibration, you technically should have to pay them under the current laws. Heck, the earth itself isn't completely symmetric - maybe God owes them money because he set the Earth spinning.
Complete. and. utter. bullshit. This has got to stop or innovation will grind to a halt (and it isn't confined to the gaming industry, either - Microsoft I'm looking at YOU).
Just my $0.02
Anticrawl @ Mar 13th 2006 3:14PM
That sounds like the regular old stubborn Sony. They're always right and all you know.
I sure hope Immersion gets reperation for their IP being taken and used without permission. I for one know what it's like. Anyone ever been to http://www.ebaumsworldsucks.com/ . You shall get what you deserve. Bout time Judges started laying the smack down on big corporations.
Anticrawl
ymmv @ Mar 13th 2006 3:16PM
MS got a great deal for $26 million dollars. According to Ars Technica, Sony might have to pay $90 million plus $30 million annualy if the courts determines their license fees. See http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060313-6366.html
Player1 @ Mar 13th 2006 3:18PM
Let's not forget that the lastest version of their flagship console doesn't support several PS2 games (2005 games included), several PS1 games, multitaps, etc. http://www.us.playstation.com/ConsumerAlerts.aspx?id=softwareTitles_75001.html
Sony makes me love my 360 more each day.
mercatfat @ Mar 13th 2006 3:19PM
I'm shocked. Twice over, I might add.
Is it intentional that the Rumble Pack + Super Princess Peach makes cute, bubbly noises?
Anticrawl @ Mar 13th 2006 3:20PM
Well, to Thomas Crymes Nintendo's big "skeleton" in their closet is the whole Nintendo Playstation thing. They were colaborating for the next generation of consoles, for obvious reasons and then Nintendo stabbed them in the back and changed plans without informing Sony. Sony was clueless until the last minute, then had to start over from scratch. There were probably some lawsuits, things like that. Which is probably why Sony got to keep the Playstation name.
I forget the entire story, but yeah basically their big crime was what spawned the Sony Playstation. But in retrospect, Nintendo is an alright company and if I had to trust one of the three it'd be Nintendo.
Anticrawl
tickytong @ Mar 13th 2006 3:23PM
Nintendo has done tons of shady things as well. If they had there way there would be now third party developers at all. A little history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo
Spartacus @ Mar 13th 2006 3:25PM
Wow. While 90.7 million dollars is a chunk of change, the far more devastating is the ruling of the sales. If this actually goes into effect, Sony could be in big trouble. No more dualshock? No more PS2? Many top selling games have to be pulled? This seems to be quite harsh, but I understand why. What I DON'T understand is why Sony chose to go to court. You can't rip off patents and get away with it scott free. MS was far wiser by settling AND investing in the company to make it mutually beneficial. Sony may face some tough times now...
RP @ Mar 13th 2006 3:25PM
"Now the question is... what evil has Nintendo committed? I'm guessing they are not squeaky clean. I don't know of many (any) large companies without skeletons in their closet."
They were slapped with a 'record' EU fine for price fixing a few years back. Then of course there's all the alleged epilepsy stuff from the early 90s. Although i don't think Nintendo were the only ones targeted.
It'll certainly be interesting to see Sony have to deal with a cock up of this magnitude in 'public'. If indeed they have to.
Derrick @ Mar 13th 2006 3:25PM
Thomas... What has Nintendo done? Nintendo was worse than Sony and Microsoft combined in the early ninties, why do you think that all the third parties left Nintendo for Sony? Nintendo forced Third parties to making their SNES games Nintendo exclusive for 2 years, until it could be sold on other consoles. Remember, power corrupts... Yes, that rule even applies to Nintendo.
Kevout @ Mar 13th 2006 3:26PM
So I assume Sony is also paying Nintendo for the multiple times they have ripped off their controllers
Mullinator @ Mar 13th 2006 3:29PM
@Josh Warner
I am not at all up to date about this whole affair, nor do I know what the patent in question contains. However I suspect the problem is more associated not with "non-symmetric mass rotating" but rather specifically how they implement it. It is highly unlikely they patented this whole theory, rather they patented a method of utilizing it, in which case Sony and Microsoft really were pretty stupid in using it when they probably could have just tried a slightly different method.
Anyway, Sony is in a big mess right now. Forced through restructuring, problems with Blu-ray, problems with Cell, problems with release dates, problems with root kits, problems with rising consumer anger (mostly related to root kits), problems dealing with Korean MMORPG developers, problems with the cost of the PS3 (they have even gone on record saying the PS3 will be more of a family purchase and that they expect people to "work" for it), finally they are also currently having PR problems.
Sony really needs to get it's act together.
Thomas Crymes @ Mar 13th 2006 3:30PM
I agree that IP rights have gone a little too far, but I don't know the specifics of this case. The only thing I can judge is that Immersion hass been deemed correct under current law, and know that Sony has screwed and tried to screw again and again people who do have a legitimate gripe with them (the walkman story is apalling), so I have no sympathy for Sony.
BatzRadio @ Mar 13th 2006 3:31PM
#10
Not so much, since that was mostly a hush-hush situation, and mostly speculated on.
Nintendo was litigation city in the late 80's. Lockout Chips, unlicensed third party games, Tengen, the great Tetris fiasco, and the game genie all went into court. A lot of this was very public too.
And I'm sure that doesn't even scratch the surface, as I'm sure a couple of the true NES-era Nintendo historians can tell you...
Jay @ Mar 13th 2006 3:33PM
Actually, Derrick, the reason why people like Square, Enix, Capcom moved away from Nintendo was entirely due to the CD format being pushed by Sony. Nintendo never intended on using the CD as a machines primary medium way up until the technology was so fast, so brilliant that it could prevent major load times (one of Nintendo's few-known golden rules of development).
I'm sorry, I didn't read all the above posts, but why have Nintendo not been sued? Or did they develop a new kind of rumble system?
On another note. I only recently realised that Sony's controllers have no triggers. Maybe I've played too many racers on the Xbox but how on earth do you drive properly in a game without triggers? Seeing that racing games are Sony's "killer genre" surely it would be wise to stick some kind of analogue control in there somewhere?
Dualshock. Please die.
RevJonathan @ Mar 13th 2006 3:33PM
Since Microsoft owns Immersion, doesn't it stand to reason that Immersion probably was unreasonable in getting a settlement to hurt the PS2? Sounds to me like Microsoft is doing this to Sony so that they won't be able to make a controller. Sony won't be able to sell games or consoles until the PS3 is released. Massive damage if it were to happen, but I'm sure Sony will wiggle out, they always do.
Still, seems like this was intentional by Microsoft, stopping a settlement to hurt Sony.
The1 @ Mar 13th 2006 3:34PM
SONY needs to stop being pigheaded and pay up. As Riley from the Boondocks told Santa, "You gotta pay what you owe."
BatzRadio @ Mar 13th 2006 3:34PM
Oh yeah I forgot about the price-fixing.
Also don't forget about manufactured "chip shortages" to artificially inflate demand.
Thomas Crymes @ Mar 13th 2006 3:35PM
Power and love of money corrupt. You can't avoid it.
MosquitoControl @ Mar 13th 2006 3:37PM
Nintendo did it their own way. Which is why this isn't a problem with IP law but a problem with Sony's implementation.
Personally I've always hated the PSX controller, particularly for its lack of triggers. It always felt awkward and uncomfortable, but the lack of a trigger just hindered everything beyond just that.
Nmaster @ Mar 13th 2006 3:42PM
Nintendo may not be 100% innocent, but in general they have more crimes commited against them than that they themselves commit. Look at their track record in the courts, they've won some huge cases. The Iron Curtain Tetris Scandel? Universal Studios and the Kong license? Nintendo's got a really interesting history in legal battles, and it's mostly in their favor.
No company is perfect, but I'd say Nintendo is as close as you can get to it in today's world. Sure, they had some 3rd-party issues in the past, but they've realized their mistakes since then and in all reality they're an entirely different company now.
Certainly, if you compare Nintendo to Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo is an absolute angel compared to the devils of those two.
soco @ Mar 13th 2006 3:43PM
@Josh Warner
while there are certainly crap patents, this isn't one of them. the patent isn't as broad as you're portraying it. it's true you could make any number of patents look that broad and silly. NEC has one for "Apparatus for Generating Sound Through Low Frequency and Noise Modulation", but it, like most patents, are very specific. it was for the PC-Engine, and covers just that hardware. if you just judge by the title of the patent, it sounds very far reaching, but in realtiy, it's not at all far reaching. (they also have one titled "Apparatus for Displaying A Sprite On A Screen")
it's these patents that protect innovation. after a company like Nintendo, Immersion, or whoever, puts so much money into making an innovation, it helps ensure that anyone wants to duplicate them before the time is up, that they have to pay for them to clone them, so that they can continue trying to innovate.
Manoel Neto @ Mar 13th 2006 3:45PM
Why only Sony, and why only those games? After a quick glance at the aforementioned patent, seems it covers any games that make the controller vibrate when something happens. This could extend all the way to PC games, Gamecube, N64, Dreamcast, the DS rumble pak and arcade cabinets (even if there were arcade games that featured force feedback way before that patent).
I don't see what is the "catch" in the patent that hits only some games (specially best-selling ones), and that makes it immune to the abundant prior art found in arcade cabinets.
Mullinator @ Mar 13th 2006 3:47PM
heh, I still remember reading about the whole Kong licensce fiasco with Nintendo.
Nintendo creates Donkey Kong, Universal studios sue for IP infringement. Nintendo wins and it is discovered that Universal studios actually no longer even owned the IP rights to king kong. Universal was trying to sue Nintendo over something it no longer even owned in the first place.
m3mnoch @ Mar 13th 2006 3:49PM
fascinating brass from such a little company. revenues last year were only $27 million. microsoft and sony both crap bigger than that.
anyone know what that line item is on page 39 of their annual report titled "Long-term customer advance from Microsoft?" it's looking to be the $27 million lump sum settlement and then $15 million yearly for 2004 and 2005.
under long term liabilities:
"In 2003 we executed a series of agreements with Microsoft as described in Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements that provided for settlement of our lawsuit against Microsoft as well as various licensing, sublicensing, and equity and financing arrangements. We accounted for the proceeds received under the agreements as a long-term customer advance based on certain provisions that would result in payment of funds to Microsoft. Upon Microsofts election to convert its shares of our Series A Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock (Series A Preferred Stock) into common stock in April 2004, we reduced the long-term customer advance from Microsoft to the minimum amount we would be obligated to pay Microsoft upon a settlement with Sony Computer Entertainment. The remainder of the consideration was transferred to common stock."
"Long-term customer advance" is an advance on future royalties paid perhaps? at least, the 'legal' way to buy off a patent holder?
on a quick looksie, it appears microsoft is getting around any future royalties paid to immersion through their use of wireless controllers. presumably different technology driving that haptic feedback. same for the other consoles, i'd imagine.
so. how does that future royalty thing shake out?
interesting.
m3mnoch.
SP @ Mar 13th 2006 3:57PM
Damn, this looks like it could be the beginning of the end for Sony...
Kevin Hanson @ Mar 13th 2006 3:58PM
Wow...
I feel pretty bad for Sony on this one. Pretty expensive piece of dumb luck right here. Well, crap...
I really hope the best for them w/ PS3, but it just doesn't look good.
Silly Sony,
they should have capitalized on their brand recognition and just taken a PS2 architecture, throw a few extra cores in there, jack up the clockspeed, and get a new graphics chip, effectively making a cheap, powerful PS3. Instead i have a feeling their flagship videogame biz is going to drive them into the ground...
the u @ Mar 13th 2006 4:01PM
@#5
"This is an excellent example of how ridiculous "intellectual property" law has become. Seriously, Immersion is trying to claim that they (and ONLY they) have the rights to technology involving a non-symmetric mass rotating?"
companies are giving the proper right to protect themselves from the theft of products or ideas. Some companies exist only as a licencee of a technology. This is an example. sony knew they were stealing a technology and didn't care.
This is not about wobbly weights or however you put it. Immersion INVENTED and licenses out their force feedback technology to many companies, not just video games. Sony is only the first to show stupidity and ignore immersion's right to their technology.
Sony is getting what they deserve.
Momus @ Mar 13th 2006 4:04PM
I am torn.
In the one hand, I want to see Sony and Microsoft gutted by a smaller company and be made to bleed their millions.
And, on the other hand, I want force feedback to do more than just make a wangular piece of plastic vibrate in my hand.
Why not just buy the intellectual properties off them? (#1 was wrong: Microsoft hasn't bought Immersion.)
Anticrawl @ Mar 13th 2006 4:14PM
Sony should have payed attention to those G.I. Joe cartoons in the 80s. Then they wouldn't be in the position they are in today.
"... and knowing is half the battle."
G.I. Joeeeeeeeeee!
Anticrawl
MosquitoControl @ Mar 13th 2006 4:16PM
"This could extend all the way to PC games, Gamecube, N64, Dreamcast, the DS rumble pak and arcade cabinets (even if there were arcade games that featured force feedback way before that patent)."
As mentioned, Nintendo did things their own way and did not infringe on this patent. Which shows that the patent isn't as broad as the non-lawyer non-engineers here seem to think.
I don't know about the DC, but you can't get blood from a turnip, so it's moot regardless.
XtremeGamer99 @ Mar 13th 2006 4:22PM
Now the question is... what evil has Nintendo committed?"
They used to be very suit happy back in the early days. They used to have heated battles between Atari and Sega. Most of the time, Nintendo won (King Kong v. Donkey Kong, anyone?), but they kindof got bad publicity whith the whole game designer monopoly thing. Recently, however, I don't think they have really stollen anything. They always think of new things themselves, and whatever technologies they don't own, they either pay for a lisence or flat-out buy the company.
Nintendo seems to be the cleanest gaming company right now... ._.
Kool_Kid_Joe @ Mar 13th 2006 4:32PM
"Sony argued that Craig Thorner, a former paid consultant to Immersion who submitted testimony on Sony's behalf."
Fragment, not a sentance. What did Sony argue that Thorner did?
In any event, I'm a Nintendo fanboy myself, so I'm kinda glad they're not getting sued right now. Perhaps they even pay royalties. Or maybe, since the GCN is lowest of the three consoles, Immersion didn't bother suing.
Or maybe Immersion and Ninty are cooperating.
plagiarize @ Mar 13th 2006 4:54PM
okay, lets clear this all up.
the Immersion patent is for the use of *two* independantly controlled cam style weights in either side of a controller, for the use of simulating rudimentary force feedback in a controller. i believe the specific example they cite is a racing game where if the left side of the car went off road, the left side of the controller would vibrate in a more pronounced fashion.
if a game uses the two cams for identical force feedback, i think there's no problem. if the controller used something other than cams (as nintendo's rumble paks and joypad controller do for example) they'd be fine.
immersion are one of the leading researchers and innovators in the force feedback field. they actually make stuff. they actually license stuff. this isn't at all like the Blackberry case.
patents are meant to protect small companies that innovate from big companies just stealing their idea. that's pretty much the idea for them, and this is a text book patent case. immersion, the smaller company, put all the money into developing a technology, they patent it, they manufacture things that use it, they license it, and a big company just steals the idea.
part of immersion's case was that the tech had been demoed to sony before sony started using it. there's no question that at least some people at sony were aware of immersion's ideas, and even if seperate people came up with the same idea other people at the company knew it wasn't an original one.
even if sony thought they'd invented the idea, the patent office would have told them otherwise. as far as patent cases go, this is open and shut. sony need to pay up, pay them licensing fees on dual shock controllers, or pull them from shelves and replace them with alternate technology.
striegs @ Mar 13th 2006 4:56PM
What if Sony opts to omit the haptics from all future PS2 DualShock controllers? Would they still have to pony up that (potentially) $30 million licensing fee? After all, as far as the individual merits of each console are concerned, whether or not your controller gives force feedback is moot when compared to the quality of the titles available. Even if removing the haptics from their controllers did somehow result in a dip in sales ("OMG WERE IS TEH RUMBEL?!?"), it can't be anywhere on the order of $30 million.
By the way, just how large is Microsoft's stake in Immersion? Are there any other major players in the industry (say, Nintendo) that have a stake in them as well?
32_footsteps @ Mar 13th 2006 4:59PM
I'm not going to speak on any of Nintendo's past problems. However, it's worth noting that I interviewed Immersion's president over a year ago. I specifically asked him about Nintendo and their rumble technology. He said that after analysis, Nintendo used a different technique not covered by Immersion's patents. This is why Nintendo is not mentioned in these suits at all. This is also why the patent isn't frivolous - it refers to a very specific technique that both Microsoft and Sony used - but it's not the only technique, as Nintendo found one that isn't covered by the patent.
Rishard Chapoteau @ Mar 13th 2006 5:22PM
I don't understand why Sony didn't just pay the money. I thought this was settled when it was brought up a year or 2 ago.
Personally I would love to see them have to yank there products off the market for being to cheap to pay for what they are stealing.
I wonder if the PS3 was scheduled to use the dual shock technology that they are using in the PS2.
Conn @ Mar 13th 2006 5:41PM
Pfft, the Dualshock sucks anyway. The lack of triggers is horrible, but I can easily ignore that by simply buying FPS/racing games for my Xbox (or Gamecube.. or 360), but that's not all. The analog sticks are stiff and lack grip, the DPad is annoying and it feels awkward and small.
Thankfully, there's always the Logitech Cordless Action controller..
tactics @ Mar 13th 2006 5:42PM
anticrawl. dont exaggerate. nintendo is the "good son" in the industry, despite being bullies back in "the good 'ol days"
the stranglehold they had on 3rd parties was primarily the "nintendo seal of quality" meaning, if nintendo didnt qualify your game, you didnt get it licensed and distributed for a nintendo console.
it's no wonder all the 3rd parties jumped ship to sony. this is one of the reasons backing my belief that sony flat-out ruined video games forever singlehandedly. by not having any standards for what games could be published on their console, 3rd parties were allowed, and maybe even encouraged, to release the shittiest games ever known to man on sonys ps1 and rake in profits on the unsuspecting consumers who paid 50$ a pop for the shit... its soooo sad.
i'm SO glad that sony is getting fucked once again. fuck sony. i hope ps3 crashes and burns, figuratively... (unlike the xbox360 that LITERALLY crashes and "burns" [overheats])
heh. that's funny. i'm funny.
Darth Pixel @ Mar 13th 2006 5:44PM
I am sure the fact Microsoft owns a stake in Immersion has nothing to do with this.
Microsoft are up to their old tricks again.
Patent law is ridiculous. It was true when Microsoft was the victim, it is no less true now that Sony is the victim.
Can anyone still fart without having to pay royalty fees?
Nin10dude @ Mar 13th 2006 5:48PM
One more nail in Sony's coffin.
Anticrawl @ Mar 13th 2006 5:54PM
To tactics,
Sorry bud, I think you tagged my name onto the wrong post. I never said anything negative about the Nintendo seal of quality, or mention it for that matter. I for one loved the fact Nintendo did this. They are the only one of the bunch that truely sits back and looks at the past of the industry all the way up to the present. They realized back then that "Hey, those guys let shitty games on their machine, those horrible games caused the industry to crash...... yeah lets not do that." I hate history for the sole reason that it's never used, why study it if you can't take advice from other people's mistakes or your own to better yourself. Sony could learn a lot from reflecting on it's past, but as we all know, they are like Big Brother's government. They are perfect, all knowing and make no mistakes and their way is the best way. Then again that same ego they have about themself and their goods is what makes them so appealing to certain people.
Anticrawl
Anticrawl @ Mar 13th 2006 6:08PM
I have one thing to say to "Patent law is ridiculous."
The only man who can claim this is one who has made a fortune off of another's ideas/creations or well, I hate to say it, a complete moron.
I'll try to think of a way to translate this senario into something one can relate to.
Let's say you pour your life and money into creating a new and efficient energy source for instance. You finally manage to pull it off after years of your life given up to further advance our standard of living. You manage to get enough money to pay for the 200K ish worldwide patent. Soon after it's been filed/accepted you hear of some man who took your idea as his own, parading around like he came up with it, without your concent. He is recognized as a hero for something you did first. He becomes famous and extremely wealthy for it. Your entire life you spent has been wasted for nothing. After a few years of scrapping through life, saving money you manage to save enough to possibly get some recognition for atleast initially inventing it. People laugh at you, call you a liar, lawyers won't take your case because of the power of the man who stole your idea, the power he gained over the years from your creation. You manage to get a lawyer, and not a very good one at that, and end up losing to the thief, wasting your last bit of money. They have the original patent removed, correcting it to state that they were the original creator. You die a lonely and cold death.
Anticrawl
Darth Pixel @ Mar 13th 2006 6:37PM
I made a fortune off of another's ideas/creations.
It's called "the Internet." Thankfully, nobody patented it before I could make a fortune.
Now, the picture you painted was great.
I can't wait to read about you when Microsoft knocks at your door to collect their royalty fee for the air you breathe while typing it.
Hiro Protagonist @ Mar 13th 2006 6:37PM
Thats harsh Anticrawl... Real harsh.
Anyways, Gunpei Yokoi died because of a car accident.
(Nintendo also used to be related to the Mafia and had "Love" hotels.)