Nintendo hit with $30 million in damages in 3DS patent case

[Qtis]

As quite a few of you know, Nintendo has received a bit of problems with their 3DS console in regards to patents. Now a federal court has ordered Nintendo to pay up $30 million in damages to Tomita Technologies after it found the new handheld infringing a patent filed in 2003 by Sejiro Tomita. The reason? In 2003, Mr Tomita was one of the people showing their tech to big N for possible uses in new consoles.

In arguments heard in a federal court last month, Tomita presented evidence that he had met with several Nintendo R&D engineers in 2003 to show off a prototype of his technology. Nintendo argued that Tomita was one of many potential vendors that it met with and that the patent was overly vague in a number of ways. The judge disagreed, noting in his decision numerous similarities between the 3DS' stereoscopic display and the one described in Tomita's patent.

Source via ArsTechnica

Personally I'm a bit surprised. Not sure how this will proceed in future court sessions, but prototypes are indeed a bit of a gray area in regards to future uses. Especially in the tech industry with fast paced changes

 

[Janthran]

This Tomita guy shouldn't have won. People on this forum always side against the patent holders, right?

 

[Qtis]

This Tomita guy shouldn't have won. People on this forum always side against the patent holders, right?

Personally I think the same, but the information on the subject is pretty vague. The patent isn't the only issue here, since the prototype of Tomita's tech has a part in the equation. If the proto was very close to what the 3DS offers in terms of the new display, it's a just verdict. If the proto was just a 3D capable screen, the situation changes very much in favor of Nintendo IMO.

 

[p1ngpong]

30 million? Oh no. Nintendo are going to have to dip a bucket in one of their swimming pools filled with cash to pay this off. ;O;

 

[Qtis]

30 million? Oh no. Nintendo are going to have to dip a bucket in one of their swimming pools filled with cash to pay this off. ;O;

Almost the same as telling Apple to pay $500000 to someone for a piece of tech. It's not like they have problems with equity

 

[Janthran]

Personally I think the same, but the information on the subject is pretty vague. The patent isn't the only issue here, since the prototype of Tomita's tech has a part in the equation. If the proto was very close to what the 3DS offers in terms of the new display, it's a just verdict. If the proto was just a 3D capable screen, the situation changes very much in favor of Nintendo IMO.

It's not Nintendo's tech at all, though. They used someone else's 3D screens instead of this guy's, and now he's upset about it.

As far as I can tell, anyway.

 

[BAHIM Z 360]

Does that mean that the Vita will win!? (Runs away like a chicken )

Lol but I don't think that will hurt Nintendo badly judging by their profits from their DS handhelds and that Nintendo Penis with the white vibrator

 

[ShadowSoldier]

30 million? Oh no. Nintendo are going to have to dip a bucket in one of their swimming pools filled with cash to pay this off. ;O;

Don't you mean "Oh no, Nintendo is going to have to look under the cushions on their couch to pay this off."

 

[Bladexdsl]

only 30m? yeah ninty is gonna pick up DA cheque on DIS sheit dawg Ezy

 

[Taleweaver]

Erm...isn't this the same guy from this thread? Strange...I honestly thought he didn't had a chance because the 3DS doesn't use "the cross-point feature", which was mentioned to be the crucial part of Tomita's technology. I'm not sure why they are now changing that defense to "the patent is overly vague".

...perhaps because that cross-point feature claim was wrong?

 

[Rizsparky]

only 30m? yeah ninty is gonna pick up DA cheque on DIS sheit dawg Ezy

Just need to sell 250,000 consoles to break even!

 

[ShadowSoldier]

Erm...isn't this the same guy from this thread? Strange...I honestly thought he didn't had a chance because the 3DS doesn't use "the cross-point feature", which was mentioned to be the crucial part of Tomita's technology. I'm not sure why they are now changing that defense to "the patent is overly vague".

...perhaps because that cross-point feature claim was wrong?

Like I said, I'm more confused as to why it was held in the States, when Tomika is Japanese, and same with Nintendo, and Tomika didn't even go to the states, that doesn't seem fair.

 

[TyBlood13]

Doesn't a different company make the screens and put them in a GPS system that lets you see the map on one side and a movie on the other so the driver can't see it?
I may only be thinking of a comparison of the screens however

 

[DiscostewSM]

It really is quite stupid. Nintendo doesn't make the screens. They simply use them. This guy didn't go after Sharp, the true makers of the screens. He went after a company who is successful with a product that uses them, which just so happens to be competing with Sony who this guy was formerly employed with. As much as this looks like pure coincidence, I'm tending to think otherwise. 30mil may be pocket change to Nintendo, but I think the negative appearance of all this is more damaging.

edit:
And another note. Sharp isn't only making these screens for Nintendo, right? Don't other products use them too? Then, why isn't this guy going after them, since this case is winning in his favor based on use and not production?

 

[heartgold]

This is sharp's tech used in many other devices besides 3DS, I believe. Nintendo didn't create it. I don't understand, anyhow this guy is rich. He'll be having a nice dinner out tonight.

No big deal, just pocket money to the size of a company like Nintendo.

 

[JoostinOnline]

This is sharp's tech used in many other devices besides 3DS, I believe. Nintendo didn't create it. I don't understand, anyhow this guy is rich. He'll be having a nice dinner out tonight.

No big deal, just pocket money to the size of a company like Nintendo.

30 million isn't pocket money, no matter what company you are.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

30 million isn't pocket money, no matter what company you are.

Out of a 10-11 billion dollar company? Yeah it is.

 

[chyyran]

It really is quite stupid. Nintendo doesn't make the screens. They simply use them. This guy didn't go after Sharp, the true makers of the screens. He went after a company who is successful with a product that uses them, which just so happens to be competing with Sony who this guy was formerly employed with. As much as this looks like pure coincidence, I'm tending to think otherwise. 30mil may be pocket change to Nintendo, but I think the negative appearance of all this is more damaging.

edit:
And another note. Sharp isn't only making these screens for Nintendo, right? Don't other products use them too? Then, why isn't this guy going after them, since this case is winning in his favor based on use and not production?

Mr. Tomita is a Sony fanboy.

Still, Nintendo didn't actually use Tomita's tech, they've developed that separately on their own, even though Nintendo took Tomita's idea. Kinda like the case between Elisha Gray and Alexander G. Bell with the Telephone.. A lot of similarities there. Not to say that Tomita shouldn't be compensated, but still, patent law should be fixed up.

This case certainly is odd though, since it was held in the US and Tomita only went after Nintendo, as said before, though, if it were me, I'd go after Nintendo, Sharp, et al rather than just Nintendo though.

 

[heartgold]

30 million isn't pocket money, no matter what company you are.

And you only quote me?

They have over 10B in the bank with no debt. It won't hurt them.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Out of a 10-11 billion dollar company? Yeah it is.

No, because even if that's a small percentage of their net worth, there is a LOT you can do with 30 million. For example, think of all the advertising that would buy. News that a company just lost that much money is also bad for business. I hardly expect this will help their stock.

I don't disagree that it's not as hard hitting as it would be to a smaller company. This is complete conjecture, but I'd say that this will have a harder affect on their image as a whole.