Perhaps following the advice of some inspirational kitty poster, Wall Wireless refuses to limit its potential by naming an actual figure it's suing for; instead asking for "no less than a reasonable royalty." Good luck with the settlement, fellas!
Perhaps following the advice of some inspirational kitty poster, Wall Wireless refuses to limit its potential by naming an actual figure it's suing for; instead asking for "no less than a reasonable royalty." Good luck with the settlement, fellas!
Reader Comments (44)
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:44AM xxxsam said
Yeah, it's like, I'm normally against terrorism let alone corporate murder, but I certainly wish Nintendo, Sony, and Nokia would drop some psycho a few bills to bomb these f**kers back into the stone age.
:)
Well, okay, that's a bit harsh, and I'm technically against capital punishment too. But you know, some prison time for these bastards would be nice... or failing that, just a reform of the patent system to abolish all patents on software/business processes and other 'virtual' ideas (=not hardware, medicines, etc).
Sadly, wide-ranging patent reform is probably less likely than that family-friendly Nintendo actually would bomb these guys... using a cruise missile controlled by DSi, while Sony stream a high-definition live feed of the carnage, and Nokia makes it available to everyone's phone as well...
Reply
:)
Well, okay, that's a bit harsh, and I'm technically against capital punishment too. But you know, some prison time for these bastards would be nice... or failing that, just a reform of the patent system to abolish all patents on software/business processes and other 'virtual' ideas (=not hardware, medicines, etc).
Sadly, wide-ranging patent reform is probably less likely than that family-friendly Nintendo actually would bomb these guys... using a cruise missile controlled by DSi, while Sony stream a high-definition live feed of the carnage, and Nokia makes it available to everyone's phone as well...
Posted: Feb 25th 2009 1:15PM Larz said
I disagree zero one,
the patent is talking about distributing interactive media. Therefore they must be suing over using a wireless network to deliver games to the console. I assume that's why Microsoft wasn't included too, since the wireless adapter is an add-on.
But I think with some clever lawyer work they could get the case dropped by focusing on the "real-time" portion of the patent.
Reply
the patent is talking about distributing interactive media. Therefore they must be suing over using a wireless network to deliver games to the console. I assume that's why Microsoft wasn't included too, since the wireless adapter is an add-on.
But I think with some clever lawyer work they could get the case dropped by focusing on the "real-time" portion of the patent.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:31AM Chris DPSN AggieCEO XBLThe Aggi said
I'm sure that some people woulda argue that the PS3 & Wii have their own mini "networks" that they use to make the controller communicate with console but me myself I just dont see that falling under the conditions of that particular patent. hell wasnt Nintendo sued last year for the motion use of the controller??? that one was more believable than this one
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:56AM (Unverified) said
lulz. "puff....puffpufff..steady stream........puff" in smoke signals translates to "You are likely to be eaten by a grue."
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 8:39PM (Unverified) said
Funny idea Drakhen but Zork was single player, not sure why you'd want to play it remotely.
MUD = multi user dungeon.
Reply
MUD = multi user dungeon.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:37AM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said
"allegedly infringing on its patent for "Method and Apparatus for Creating and Distributing Real-Time Interactive Media Content Through Wireless Communication Networks and the Internet.""
That sounds pretty ambigious. Not surprised that the suit was filed from Texas which from I understand is the patent troll capital of the world. I would like to hear more about the alleged violations before dismissing it outright but from what we have heard it sounds very generic.
Reply
That sounds pretty ambigious. Not surprised that the suit was filed from Texas which from I understand is the patent troll capital of the world. I would like to hear more about the alleged violations before dismissing it outright but from what we have heard it sounds very generic.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:52AM Kattleox said
I'm going to make a prediction:
Next week, some tiny investment company will come out of nowhere with an ambiguous patent and sue a major electronics corporation for billions due to infringement of said patent, lose the case, or make a marginal profit.
Two weeks from now, some tiny investment company will come out of nowhere with an ambiguous patent and sue a major electronics corporation...
Reply
Next week, some tiny investment company will come out of nowhere with an ambiguous patent and sue a major electronics corporation for billions due to infringement of said patent, lose the case, or make a marginal profit.
Two weeks from now, some tiny investment company will come out of nowhere with an ambiguous patent and sue a major electronics corporation...
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 11:53AM (Unverified) said
And they're JUST NOW realizing that the Wiimote is "infringing on their copyright"? Or did the conversation go something like this?
September 2006
Jerk1: "Hey boss. Have you seen this new thing that Nintendo is releasing? It's called the Wii and it uses "Method and Apparatus for Creating and Distributing Real-Time Interactive Media Content Through Wireless Communication Networks and the Internet."
Jerk2: It does what? But that's our thing!
Jerk1: I know. You think maybe we have grounds for a lawsuit?"
Jerk2: Oh yeah. But let's sit on it for almost two and a half years before doing anything about it. That way we can see if it makes a lot of money before we try to squeeze it all out of them. Plus it'll really make us look like assholes.
Reply
September 2006
Jerk1: "Hey boss. Have you seen this new thing that Nintendo is releasing? It's called the Wii and it uses "Method and Apparatus for Creating and Distributing Real-Time Interactive Media Content Through Wireless Communication Networks and the Internet."
Jerk2: It does what? But that's our thing!
Jerk1: I know. You think maybe we have grounds for a lawsuit?"
Jerk2: Oh yeah. But let's sit on it for almost two and a half years before doing anything about it. That way we can see if it makes a lot of money before we try to squeeze it all out of them. Plus it'll really make us look like assholes.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:06PM pokes said
im sorry but this is just stupid.
Doesn't the DLNA standard cover this or some type of standard?
Thats it im going to file some seamingly ridiculous patents (in the US of course) and some day one of these big companies will step on my toes and i'll be rich.
That idea is mine - no stealing!!
Reply
Doesn't the DLNA standard cover this or some type of standard?
Thats it im going to file some seamingly ridiculous patents (in the US of course) and some day one of these big companies will step on my toes and i'll be rich.
That idea is mine - no stealing!!
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:07PM GreenElf said
The funny thing is, and this may cause them to loose their suit, is that with this patent, they could be suing ALOT more people.
I own a Dell laptop that can play 'Real-Time Interactive Media Content Through Wireless Communication Networks and the Internet'.
Why aren't they suing Dell? Or ALL Cellphone providers for that matter? Apple has a great big pile o' cash behind the iPhone being a gaming machine. You think that they would file the smell of the money...
F***ing Patent Trolls.
Reply
I own a Dell laptop that can play 'Real-Time Interactive Media Content Through Wireless Communication Networks and the Internet'.
Why aren't they suing Dell? Or ALL Cellphone providers for that matter? Apple has a great big pile o' cash behind the iPhone being a gaming machine. You think that they would file the smell of the money...
F***ing Patent Trolls.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:40PM (Unverified) said
Good job on being a dumbass.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6640086.html
Read that. Not just the top part, scroll down and read the entire thing. Read the schematics (if you can figure out how) and then make a comment.
Your ingorant bullshit is just that, ignorant bullshit. You're throwing out claims and accusations when you clearly don't know your own ass from a hole in the ground.
Reply
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6640086.html
Read that. Not just the top part, scroll down and read the entire thing. Read the schematics (if you can figure out how) and then make a comment.
Your ingorant bullshit is just that, ignorant bullshit. You're throwing out claims and accusations when you clearly don't know your own ass from a hole in the ground.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:40PM Anticrawl said
Not one gaming website bothered to link to the actual patent though. You can find a dumbed down version here http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6640086
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:45PM (Unverified) said
DAMN PEOPLE!!
Why don't one of you morons actually READ the patent before you comment? Not one of you has any idea what you are talking about right now. Most of you are making comments that just make you look like complete idiots to those few of us who are actually smart enough to read before judging.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6640086.html
Read the whole thing (Scroll down, idiots). Schematics, other patents they cite as reference, foriegn patents that they own relating to the same technology, full description, the whole thing.
THEN comment. At least that way you won't look like the dipshits that commented before me, and if nothing else, will at least be informed enough to know that this relates to music embedded in messages, not just general data transmissions over the internet.
God you people are stupid.
Reply
Why don't one of you morons actually READ the patent before you comment? Not one of you has any idea what you are talking about right now. Most of you are making comments that just make you look like complete idiots to those few of us who are actually smart enough to read before judging.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6640086.html
Read the whole thing (Scroll down, idiots). Schematics, other patents they cite as reference, foriegn patents that they own relating to the same technology, full description, the whole thing.
THEN comment. At least that way you won't look like the dipshits that commented before me, and if nothing else, will at least be informed enough to know that this relates to music embedded in messages, not just general data transmissions over the internet.
God you people are stupid.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 12:57PM (Unverified) said
I read the entirety of your comment, and I can conclude that you, sir, are an ass.
Have a nice day now. :)
Reply
Have a nice day now. :)
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 1:05PM (Unverified) said
And you sir, are an idiot.
FYI, here is the basic rundown of this patent violation.
#1. It is not directly relevent to either the PS3 nor the Wii.
#2. It doesn't have a thing to do with downloads or data transmission.
#3. It specifically covers only music embedded in messages, sent from a handheld device to a local server, and transmitted from there to the internet, recieved by another persons local server, and then sent to their handheld device.
In otherwords, the reason this is applicable to Nintendo and Sony is because you can in some games or functions, create a message on the DS or PSP, embed music in them, then link your DS or PSP to your Wii or PS3, and then transfer those messages with embedded music to other peoples DS or PSP through their Wii or PS3.
And that's why MS wasn't sued. They don't have a handheld device that sends messages through the 360.
That's hardly the overly broad and generic, vague patent that most fools here obviously think it is. It's a really damned specific patent, and from everything I can see is absolutely valid.
Reply
FYI, here is the basic rundown of this patent violation.
#1. It is not directly relevent to either the PS3 nor the Wii.
#2. It doesn't have a thing to do with downloads or data transmission.
#3. It specifically covers only music embedded in messages, sent from a handheld device to a local server, and transmitted from there to the internet, recieved by another persons local server, and then sent to their handheld device.
In otherwords, the reason this is applicable to Nintendo and Sony is because you can in some games or functions, create a message on the DS or PSP, embed music in them, then link your DS or PSP to your Wii or PS3, and then transfer those messages with embedded music to other peoples DS or PSP through their Wii or PS3.
And that's why MS wasn't sued. They don't have a handheld device that sends messages through the 360.
That's hardly the overly broad and generic, vague patent that most fools here obviously think it is. It's a really damned specific patent, and from everything I can see is absolutely valid.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 1:10PM (Unverified) said
I'd like to write some long winded paragraph about how weak you are, but I really hate typing so I'll just say fuck you instead.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 2:31PM JuanLovesHorror said
What you said does make a lot of sense but you don't have to act like an ass.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 4:21PM Levi Partridge said
It's easier to catch flies with honey than vinegar AkaMagi. And you're less likely to sound like an asshole when you do so.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 5:02PM Foetoid said
Hey AkaMagi. It's fine to prove someone wrong, its even more fine to be witty and intelligent about it, but going off like a crazy, tantrum-throwing 4yr old who's about to prove someone wrong for the first time just makes you look worse than the idiots you're trying to make your point at AkaMagi. I guess you're just one of those idiots who takes shit WAY too seriously.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 6:26PM Rabidkeebler said
I read the patent. I'll comment. You are a retard. There, I said it. I'm not going to create a free account to see the schematics, but several times they make reference to a cell phone shaped object.
As for the application, Many of the things that it does, including feedback and measurement Nintendo and Sony have already been sued over. As far as I can tell, other than being an object that interacts with something on screen (which I've already said they have been sued over) the only thing that I can guess would be infringement is the fact that Nintendo's control makes a sound.
The problem is, as I have said several times, there are multiple patents over this issue of a control that works wireless. The problem here is that only one person/company/organization should be able to sue. Instead it seems to me Nintendo (and to a lesser extent Sony and Microsoft) are being sued over the same things, just worded differently.
Reply
As for the application, Many of the things that it does, including feedback and measurement Nintendo and Sony have already been sued over. As far as I can tell, other than being an object that interacts with something on screen (which I've already said they have been sued over) the only thing that I can guess would be infringement is the fact that Nintendo's control makes a sound.
The problem is, as I have said several times, there are multiple patents over this issue of a control that works wireless. The problem here is that only one person/company/organization should be able to sue. Instead it seems to me Nintendo (and to a lesser extent Sony and Microsoft) are being sued over the same things, just worded differently.
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 6:35PM Rabidkeebler said
Oh, and Googling Wall Wireless leads to a a home page that is blank, and info that they are suing Nokia for allowing Texts with images and sound. Also, this has been filed in East Texas, which I hope will be moved using the recent TS Tech change of venue ruling. Nintendo and Sony can say that it will be cheaper to hear the case in California.
Reply
Posted: Feb 25th 2009 6:15PM The Aquacharger said
Since when could the DS send files to the Wii or get music on it? About all there transfer between the two is Wii Download Station.
Reply
Posted: Feb 25th 2009 6:15PM The Aquacharger said
Also, Microsoft could be sued too. The Zune sends pictures, musics, and if hacked videos.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 1:19PM Dr Stabbingworth said
Intelligent comment + douchery = fuck off. Come back without the childish attitude.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 1:37PM Spunky Monkey 190906 said
Wall Wireless LLC of Plano, Texas invented teh wireless, bow to them wireless slaves!
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 2:13PM (Unverified) said
I'd like to see Wall's patent. I'd lol if it turned out that Nintendo could simply have the patent invalidated.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 10:08PM (Unverified) said
Pls note that Microsoft isn't listed for their XBox or any of the other cellphone companies either (i.e. Blackberry, Verizon, Cingular, etc). Guess they figure that if they put too many companies in, there'd be absolutely NO way they'd get away with it.
Reply
Posted: Feb 24th 2009 4:59PM Foetoid said
Spot on Stabbings. It's fine to prove someone wrong, its even more fine to be witty and intelligent about it, but going off like a crazy, tantrum-throwing 4yr old who's about to prove someone wrong for the first time just makes you look worse than the idiots you're trying to make your point at AkaMagi.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
GameStop sees majority of digital sales from cash; won't pursue used PC game sales
Posted on Feb 10th 2012 5:45PM
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 221 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 155 comments
- Blizzard taking Valve to court over 'DOTA' trademark 108 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
