Give them a Wii to play with, and they'll be quiet. ^^

"demanding Nintendo cease selling the Wii and that they get some cash-money for their troubles (which is what Interlink are requesting) might be the fastest way to get a judge to dismiss your case on sight."

?

This doesn't say any thing about gyro axis controll does it? The infer-red device is not the same used with the wii ethier. The Wii mote uses two sources. The button layout is totally different and even the casing is different. I'm thinking the only leg they could stand on is the infer-red thing yet all tv remotes use this?

I say nice try. No prize though.

Yay for Unkown American companies that wants to rip-off videogame console makers!! :P

How is it Interlink comes up with this stuff, yet never markets or sells it? Are they the equivalent of domain squatters?

And if so, did they make a SIXAXIS that stays synched?

This is gonna be dismissed in 5 minutes flat. Looking at the patent documentation, all that this has in common with the wiimote is that it A) is shaped like a remote and B) has buttons that do things. Oh, and it's wireless, but what isn't, these days? Besides, this thing uses the IR to actually send the signal out, while the IR on the wiimote only really functions for centering the location from the two 'beacons' in the sensor bar.

Nintendo should counter-sue, as they did make plastic things with buttons that do things far before this no-name company did.

hegemoney:

Uh, I have used this Interlink device. It's a common presentational mouse. They do make a gyroscopic mouse, if i recall, but it looks nothing like this. This one is a pointer / button(s) only, there is no 3D data.

And next, this company is going to sue Sony for their PS3 design...

http://www.amazon.com/Stainless-Steel-Breadbox-Silvertone-...

It won't fly. The pointer uses a "receiver" which is noted as number 12 in their diagram. The Nintendo Wiimote uses a camera to detect two light sources for triangulation (as I think was mentioned already). There is no receiver, thus the design is very different. He also uses different technology elsewhere, such as a pressure transducer, which is very different from an accelerometer. But hey, that's just me.

But why should we focus on technical points that poke holes in the case you could drive a truck through when we can make fun of the name of the plaintiff: James Dexter Tickle. It's like his parents didn't want him to ever have lunch money.

I don't see this as a problem really. Reading through the fine print of the patent details this is simply an IR mouse.

The Wiimote uses the sensor as reference whereas this mouse sends and recives data via a base station.

It explicitly states that it is a mouse for use with a computer yet they claim Nintendo are causing them loss of sales!?!?! Bizzare!

In fact, I say they should go after Sony as this patent sounds far more like the stuff Sony is talking about now.

Or go after Little Johnny as he tries to get the Wiimote working on his Linux install.

Wasn't there a law in the works to prevent applications for "junk patents" from companies that never produce any product? *cough* Immersion *cough*

interlinks patent was issued in the beginning of 2005, i wonder when Nintendo began design on the wiimote?

This is why there is no rumble on the Sixaxis. Microsoft and Nintendo both bought in on the rumble/Immersion fiasco, and it opened the door for every pissant little tech company to suck blood from the big three everytime an innovation is introduced. Don't be surprised if Nintendo settles. They buckled for Immersion, and set a nasty precedent for future patent leeches with dollar bills in their eyes.

Having read the patent, it probably won't go anywhere. Their patent is for computers, and I'm sure Ninty's is for a game machine. Second, the IR is used differently. The mouse needs the receiver to work, Wii can use candles as evidenced by countless YouTube videos... What I want to know is where were they for the last year and a half before Wii launched?? Waiting to see if it would sell probably. I'm also betting the Wii patents have a much earlier date.

I'm neither a legal nor technical guru, but from what I'm reading Interlink doesn't have much of a case. The "mouse"/"pointer" operation is completely different. Interlink's thing has some sort of touchpad, Nintendo's got actual motion sensing. IR is also not comparable. Interlink's remote just sends data with infrared, Nintendo has some sort of camera, and sends stuff over BluTooth, right ?

What remains is a roughly remote-shaped object with a trigger.

Can they do that ? Can they patent the idea of a "remote with a trigger" ? Sounds ludicrous, especially considering Nintendo has been able to use triggers on their previous gamepads.

Bah.

Just got an email from amazon UK, people who DONT have a wii LOOK:

NEWS JUST IN:

Dear Nintendo fan,

Great news! We've managed to get our hands on some more Wii consoles and will be putting them on sale between 3pm and 4pm today (Friday, December 8). Last time we sold out in 7 minutes and we expect this batch to go even more quickly.

Nintendo sold 600,000 consoles in just 8 days in the US, so you can bet that the Nintendo Wii is THE must-have item of 2006.

The wait is almost over!

...Giving you guys a heads up.. since i got mine already (thru the postie this morning :D)

Wasn't there a law in the works to prevent applications for "junk patents" from companies that never produce any product? *cough* Immersion *cough*

Actually both Immersion and this Interlink has produced products. You remember the force feedback mouse? That was Immersion's tech. So this Interlink looks like they do have a whole line of pointer projects. Only thing is that it doesn't seem like they use gyroscope or accelerometer. The only thing they seem to have in common is the shape (button on top and trigger underneath) and the fact that it points. As others have said, the pointing works in the exactly opposite way the Wii-mote does. The sensor is at the screen, not at the unit. As for the shape, unfortunately for them if Nintendo can prove their ergonomic R&D department happened upon this design because its common ergonomic sense, then they have no leg to stand on.

Having read the patent, I agree with most everyone else on this. The two designs are substantially different, serve diffent purposes, have different features, and the Wii isn't likely to divert revenue away from any 'computer remote' Interlink makes.

Though one might argue that the Wii *is* a computer.

The patent was filed in February 05, with the then-titled 'Revolution' controller being revealed in September '06. So it seems likely that some amount of design was taking place at Nintendo after the patent was filed.

Couldn't Microsoft sue Nintendo for the Xwand? (Even MS probably wouldn't.)

So Interlink is angry that the Wiimote has a trigger and believes that people are buying Wiimotes to use on PCs instead of their product?

Interlink seems to describe their device as an ergonomic computer mouse with a trigger. The Wiimote is ergonomic and has a trigger, but it is clearly not intended for use with a PC. Also, the Wiimote actually communicates with the system via Blue tooth, so the IR in this application is completely irrelevant.

SScyberVejitadude says: Dis r y nintdo suxx2!! dey mawk know gamz wit blud!!!!!! Y Ps3 wil kil thm!11! Fags!!1

Anyway, it would be cool to see Nintendo counter sue them and take all of their wireless pointers. Then Immersion would be completely unable to hold multimedia presentations. That would should them.

Does this Interlink device also destroy televisions?

Didn't Nintendo file a patent for their Wiimote? If so then it is the patent's office fault for approving them, not Nintendo.

This is why there is no rumble on the Sixaxis. Microsoft and Nintendo both bought in on the rumble/Immersion fiasco, and it opened the door for every pissant little tech company to suck blood from the big three everytime an innovation is introduced. Don't be surprised if Nintendo settles. They buckled for Immersion, and set a nasty precedent for future patent leeches with dollar bills in their eyes.

Incorrect. The rumble Nintendo used for the N64 and Gamecube is slightly different, and they hold the patent for it themselves.

Microsoft did settle, but Nintendo was never even involved.

What's that thing that the '12' is pointing at? If it's supposed to be a receiver it looks nothing like the one the Wii has.

Not to burst people's bubbles but patent law just isn't that simple. I'm no expert, but you can't dismiss this off-hand.

When they're going about this they aren't contending everything about the wiimote, for better or worse they're just talking about the specific elements of the wiimote that pertain to a possible infringement of their patent.

They don't give a rats ass about the IR pointing part about the wiimote, they're looking at how the wiimote may possibly overlap one of the "claims" that are stated at the bottom of the patent.

It all sounds weird and archaic but thats just how patents are. A lot of time you're more or less patenting an general idea for a new product not a specialized end-use device.

There is no way Nintendo will stop selling their Wiis...NO WAY!

Yes, the patent is bullshit. No, that doesn't mean that Nintendo won't have to cough up the dough. Let me in on a little secret here: Patents in general have become really fucked up recently. The original idea was for there to be no patents for obvious things. Unfortunately, many technical genres of products have become so complex that things which may look obvious to insiders look like huge inventions to outsiders. And who gets to judge what's obviouis? Not the insiders, but the courts.


The result of all of this is that companies try to patent as much as they can because they don't know what will stick. Most patents do stick, unfortunately, so companies often don't even try to fight patent disputes, but settle outside of the courts with money and cross-licensing of patents. That's why Apple licensed "one click buying" from Amazon: It's the most obvious thing ever, but that doesn't mean that courts will figure out that it is.

I just read through that document more carefully, and it really seems that Interlink is basing the case on their belief that the Wiimote is impacting sales of their mouse. This is impossible. The case is referring to a single patent for a trigger operated COMPUTER device. No matter how you spin it, the Wiimote is simply not intended for use on a computer. And yes, people are figuring out HOW to use it on a computer, but that does not change the fact that Nintendo never intended nor have they advertised the Wiimote as a COMPUTER mouse alternative. It is simply idiotic to think that the Wiimote has ANY impact on the sale of the Interlink device because the two devices operate on fundamentally exclusive machines. The only similarity between the actual devices is a trigger on the underside. You could say that the shape is somewhat similar, but that's really a stretch. Other than that, the two devices are VERY different. I'm sorry Interlink, but Nintendo is not trying to strong-arm you out of the computer mouse business.

Never f*** with Nintendo in the court of law.

I actually remember seeing a device like this, it was called the "air mouse" was it not... Dosn't this seem like they are ripping off that company instead of nintendo ripping off them?

Hum.....

Found it:
http://www.interlinkelectronics.com/index.php?id=Mzkz

RemotePoint is a cordless, handheld mouse for presentations, Web meetings, Internet surfing and other non-desktop applications. Available for the PC or Mac, RemotePoint fits comfortably in the hand and features Interlink's patented ClickTrigger design.

RemotePoint allows PC or Mac mouse control from up to 40 feet away, and it requires no special software. Simply unplug your ordinary mouse or trackball, plug in the RemotePoint receiver and start pointing from anywhere in the room.

Looks to me like it's two completely different objects, one for a gaming device which just now was hacked to use on the computer, and the other is a mouse... wireless, and pointer like..

They will lose.

Interesting that they waited for the Wii launch to be a big success before they launched their suit. They're probably optimistically hoping that if the judge grants an injunction on sales Nintendo will have to pay them masses to keep their console on the market over Christmas.

Nintendo has tv remote patents that date back to 1994. I am not lying look it up. Nintendo is probably laughing and planning a coutner suit.

Its really funny but nintendo really does have a tv remote patent from the early 90's.

If anything wouldn't this help sell Interlink's computer product? If you have a Wii, and you do presentations, and you like the Wii's function, I mean. Then you'd see this similiar product and be like, "Great!" They are after totally different markets in my opinion and the lawsuit probably won't stick. Of course, I never thought the Sony rumble thing would pan out either.

I think I'm gonna go ahead and patent the Ninstationsoft. It has a controller you swallow.

the patent has a date listed as 2005. how long ago did Nintendo release images of the controller? also of note, there is nothing about the gyroscopic controls that the Wii is based upon. (there's no way their device recognizes rotation, for instance.)

Call me crazy, but I don't think Nintendo's going to have a lot of trouble here. The only thing the Wiimote shares with this "invention" is that there's a trigger, it works with a "computer" and it uses removable batteries. It won't be very hard to find prior art on a remote control that has a trigger and removable batteries..

The only relevant question is whether the claims of the patent can be read onto the Wii remotes. I don't know enough about the Wii remote but it looks like Interlink could put forth a reasonable case.

Asking for an injunction will not cause your case to be dismissed. Doubtfall that any injunction would be granted here though.

"Wasn't there a law in the works to prevent applications for "junk patents" from companies that never produce any product? "

No. IBM is one of the leading patent applicant's in the world, but they very often do not make the products they patent. They gather huge licensing fees each year. That is one objective of the patent system - incentive innovation whether you produce the product or not.

Nothing to worry about.

1. Wiimote is not an IR emitter (it is an IR sensor)

2. "Invention" uses a crappy "D-pad" to move the mouse around.

It's kind of insulting to even compare the two. the patent describes an IR remote control. Chances are that your DVD remote has more in common with this patent than the Wii controller.

Even if you made the stretch that they are similar enough to warrant a lawsuit, you could ask why they haven't protected their IP against hundreds of "similar" products, and have the case thrown out.

If you have a patent, you have to defend it against any and all infringments, not just the first guy with deep pockets.

"That's why Apple licensed "one click buying" from Amazon: It's the most obvious thing ever, but that doesn't mean that courts will figure out that it is."

Why was that the "most obvious thing ever"? If it was so obvious, why didn't someone do it before Amazon? It only looks obvious because you're using hindsight. It was considered a big advantage for shopping on Amazon so if it was so obvious someone should have implemented it previously. Besides, if you don't want to infringe you just provide a traditional checkout process.

Someone should sue Interlink for ripping off one design of the Star Trek phaser weapon. :-p

You get nothing, you lose! Good day Interlink!

Nice try, but a wireless mouse != a bluetooth talkin', accelerometer havin', IR sensing, Wiimote!

Nintendo has patents on ir transmitters. remember there nes wireless controllers? Guess what they ran on , Yep Ir.

Nitnendo has a patent on a tv remote. Nitnendo also has controllers with triggers, remember the n64?

All nintendo has to show is either, they just combined the patents, or that the patent for the wii remote was granted before this companies.

This company has no leg to stand on what so ever.

@NameOf_A_VGChar

The Wii is a computer device. Really.

Actually I'm surprised that the patent didn't use the term "automated data processing equipment", which is often used to cast a wide net as possible.

Nintendo should countersue Interlink for taking action after the console's release. Had interlink been paying attention for the months in which the rest of the world knew about tbe wiimote they could have taken action at that point and tried to come to an amicable agreement. This lawsuit is completely transparent as a means of extortion. I hope Nintendo can run Interlink's legal fees up to their bankruptcy.

@der-Karl

Patent law is about as simple as any other law (in the US at least). Sure, we don't know what will happen, after all OJ Simpson gets to play more golf than I do.

But from a legal standpoint, Nintendo is pretty well covered. They have hundreds of related patents of their own that predate the patent in question, and a really impressive legal team (look at Universal vs. Nintendo).

I wouldn't compare this to the rumble feature, since the invention as implemented in game controllers pretty much exactly matched the patent description.

Sure Nintendo could lose of settle, but it wouldn't be based on the merits of the case.