Not sure if troll...or just incredibly stupid.
I dislike the playstation controller but you're still bordering on retarded with your comments.
Sony has patent filed that might cover parts of Wii U Controller
- Thread starter Midna
- Start date
- Views 8,829
- Replies 82
Not sure if troll...or just incredibly stupid.
I dislike the playstation controller but you're still bordering on retarded with your comments.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,484
- Trophies
- 2
- Location
- Sacramento, California
- Website
- lazerlight.x10.mx
- XP
- 5,481
- Country
I doubt it, it's just a patent, they only help to cover them legally, many many patents concepts don't even turn into an actual product ever.
It's a rectangle - too similar to the GameBoy, that would be stealing.
Not the first time Sony's gone so low though, so maybe.
I checked this thread when it was first started and due to the ambiguity of the patent figured it wasn't worth posting in. Now after seeing it coming up on 6 pages, it is more than confirmed that it isn't worth posting...
Dude, whenever ANYONE releases ANYTHING even vaguely similar to Nintendo hardware, it causes an uproar and accusations of stealing fly left and right.
[yt]9fEjJ4Ecy9Q[/yt]
That was to be expected.
I do not typically moderate threads (it is not why I am here and I am encouraged not to) but it might happen if this continues to go further off the rails.
I changed the title a bit to make it a bit easier on the internal logic.
We had a thread on this actual patent last year
http://gbatemp.net/topic/209604-sony-patents-universal-game-controller/
You can read the entire patent in question by going to http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2010/0041480.html (beware it will probably come as a PDF in the end)
For those unaware of how patents work the general idea is
You design (and preferably build- the idea needs to work) a device* that does something new or novel at which time you can draft up a patent application.
In this application you describe the device, make specific claims (actual term) about what is novel in it and how these claims go into making the device (known as preferred embodiment which is another term).
You file the patent at which point it gains "patent pending" status (it might take a couple of years to actually get the patent) which confers a fair bit of protection and should allow you to bring your device to market. After so many years the patent expires and anybody that likes to can take the ideas and run with it.
A patentable device should "not be obvious to an expert in the field at hand" which is to say if you got an expert and told them using pre patent filing knowledge to solve the problem if the method they came up with was similar to your patent then it probably does not warrant a patent and it should not have the idea used in the past for something either in general or in another patent (a term known as prior art). The US patent office has come under heavy fire these last few years for not paying much attention to the novel part of the concept (indeed my position on this patent is most of it is obvious and has been done before) and a similar level of criticism has been levelled at them for not doing their part to check for prior art.
Should someone then bring a device out that makes use of one of these claims (and roughly in the same field) it is said to infringe upon the patent owner then gets the option of taking them to court over the matter (and the sums awarded in damages can get very large indeed)- it is not quite as clear cut as that as the one doing the infringing has options (several different defences one of the most notable of which being the Gillette defence although that is less US patent law and they can try invalidating your patent if they think there is cause to like for instance they found some prior art).
A company that buys up patents from others (you can buy, sell and license patents quite happily) solely to target other companies with lawsuits is known as a patent troll (such a practice has become quite popular so for better or worse it is not uncommon for a patent lawsuit featuring a smaller company to elicit a kneejerk reaction of patent troll) to be and on the flip side large companies have taken to buying lots of patents (to make a portfolio) in an attempt to stop themselves being sued (if you sue me I will use my portfolio to attack you and then everybody loses) and it goes on and one- it is a huge area of law with hundreds of areas of specialisation before you even get to field specific stuff (medicine, software, electronics, traditional engineering.....).
*most of the world just does devices but some places will allow software methods and business methods to be patented much to the dismay of other places in the world and the less said about some of the things going on in the biology patents world the better.
I changed the title a bit to make it a bit easier on the internal logic.
We had a thread on this actual patent last year
http://gbatemp.net/topic/209604-sony-patents-universal-game-controller/
You can read the entire patent in question by going to http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2010/0041480.html (beware it will probably come as a PDF in the end)
For those unaware of how patents work the general idea is
You design (and preferably build- the idea needs to work) a device* that does something new or novel at which time you can draft up a patent application.
In this application you describe the device, make specific claims (actual term) about what is novel in it and how these claims go into making the device (known as preferred embodiment which is another term).
You file the patent at which point it gains "patent pending" status (it might take a couple of years to actually get the patent) which confers a fair bit of protection and should allow you to bring your device to market. After so many years the patent expires and anybody that likes to can take the ideas and run with it.
A patentable device should "not be obvious to an expert in the field at hand" which is to say if you got an expert and told them using pre patent filing knowledge to solve the problem if the method they came up with was similar to your patent then it probably does not warrant a patent and it should not have the idea used in the past for something either in general or in another patent (a term known as prior art). The US patent office has come under heavy fire these last few years for not paying much attention to the novel part of the concept (indeed my position on this patent is most of it is obvious and has been done before) and a similar level of criticism has been levelled at them for not doing their part to check for prior art.
Should someone then bring a device out that makes use of one of these claims (and roughly in the same field) it is said to infringe upon the patent owner then gets the option of taking them to court over the matter (and the sums awarded in damages can get very large indeed)- it is not quite as clear cut as that as the one doing the infringing has options (several different defences one of the most notable of which being the Gillette defence although that is less US patent law and they can try invalidating your patent if they think there is cause to like for instance they found some prior art).
A company that buys up patents from others (you can buy, sell and license patents quite happily) solely to target other companies with lawsuits is known as a patent troll (such a practice has become quite popular so for better or worse it is not uncommon for a patent lawsuit featuring a smaller company to elicit a kneejerk reaction of patent troll) to be and on the flip side large companies have taken to buying lots of patents (to make a portfolio) in an attempt to stop themselves being sued (if you sue me I will use my portfolio to attack you and then everybody loses) and it goes on and one- it is a huge area of law with hundreds of areas of specialisation before you even get to field specific stuff (medicine, software, electronics, traditional engineering.....).
*most of the world just does devices but some places will allow software methods and business methods to be patented much to the dismay of other places in the world and the less said about some of the things going on in the biology patents world the better.
Let's not forget that some companies attempt patenting some devices/techniques that are pretty much indispensible in another device that is to be released.
Say, a smaller developer creates a revolutionary type of remote and by means of corporate espionage another body learns about this and patents certain parts to later sell that patent when the device in question is complete, among other dirty tactics such as patenting something that is painfuly obvious - yes, that still flies in some countries and may effectively hinder sales/export/import (For example Apple and their famous "Rectangular shape" patent which was one of many that killed Samsung sales in many countries).
Still, a better title would be "Sony patents a possible use of the WiiU controller," although the patent covers areas (augumenting video) that the WiiU controller can't even perform because it doesn't have a backwards-facing camera.
EDIT: Did you guys even read the patent application and what it covers, or are you just jumping to conclusions based on the illustration in the first post?
EDIT: Did you guys even read the patent application and what it covers, or are you just jumping to conclusions based on the illustration in the first post?
I fail to see that my opinion is "retarded" ? Just because it differs from yours ?
I dislike the Sony controllers - I think they suck and are incredibly uncomfortable to use. Therefore I don't buy one, or anything remotely similar in design to it ?
Please explain which part of that is "retarded" ?
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,214
- Country
Hmm...maybe it's not so stupid after all.
"I hate Sony so I'm NEVER gonna use a controller with 2 analog sticks EVER!"
Nope, it's still retarded.
I agree to the point that this is Smurf's opinion and it's not "retarded", he has the right to dislike it. If I were to change something, I would definatelly move the left analog stick to where the D-Pad is and vice-versa, similarily to the Gamecube and XBox controller positions because that's just more comfortable for my thumbs. The point that Dual Shock-like controllers are the most popular and beloved type still stands though, and Smurf is one of the rare few that dislike it.
Omitting his opinion, everything in his post was retarded.
I mean i'd quote and highlight, but just read them. If you don't think they're retarded, then you're probably wearing a helmet too.
Like I said, I dislike the Playstation controllers. Hell i'm always pretty vocal about it in 360 vs PS3 threads, but yeah, that wasn't what I was calling him retarded for.
I mean i'd quote and highlight, but just read them. If you don't think they're retarded, then you're probably wearing a helmet too.
Like I said, I dislike the Playstation controllers. Hell i'm always pretty vocal about it in 360 vs PS3 threads, but yeah, that wasn't what I was calling him retarded for.
Not as retarded as fabricating quotes - the above is clearly not what I said.
I said I hate Sony, then mentioned that I also hate their controllers. I don't hate their controllers BECAUSE I hate Sony lol.
I like the 2 analog sticks on the Xbox360 controller just fine thankyou. That's why I have 2 for each of my Xboxes. They are much more comfortable than the Sony ones.
Also I didn't buy any Sony consoles because the opposition was always much more interesting for me (Saturn, Dreamcast, Xbox360).
In my original post there was a cerain element of trolling of course - surprised you missed it. Probably you were in a little too much of a hurry to pontificate and be the internet big-man and make your little e-winkie grow a little bit.
Now please go and find someone else to argue with - you have bored me
Not as retarded as fabricating quotes - the above is clearly not what I said.
I said I hate Sony, then mentioned that I also hate their controllers. I don't hate their controllers BECAUSE I hate Sony lol.
I like the 2 analog sticks on the Xbox360 controller just fine thankyou. That's why I have 2 for each of my Xboxes. They are much more comfortable than the Sony ones.
Also I didn't buy any Sony consoles because the opposition was always much more interesting for me (Saturn, Dreamcast, Xbox360).
In my original post there was a cerain element of trolling of course - surprised you missed it. Probably you were in a little too much of a hurry to pontificate and be the internet big-man and make your little e-winkie grow a little bit.
Now please go and find someone else to argue with - you have bored me
So not being interested in something justifies hating it?
I'm not fond of Playstation controllers as well, especially compared to the glorious Xbox 360 controller, but it certainly works and can be credited for having a major impact on game design.
Or are you one of those people who was never interested in Sony before and now "hates them" and "boycotts them" because you love the hate bandwagon?
It's good to know I have a fellow enthusiast of this clip.
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
Xdqwerty
what are you looking at?
