Thrillhaus

Be careful not to confuse this. InterLink's device does not (unless I'm severely mistaken) move the cursor around depending on where you point it, as the Wii-mote does. It's just a mouse that you can hold in the air, while pushing stuff on it to make the cursor move.

burnblue

dcartist

Until Nintendo adds the Web Browser and Weather Channel.com, then that would be as hard to.

EnigmaNemesis

Where the complaint has merit:
Interlink legally owns the patent for a handheld cursor pointing computer interface device that has 3 defining characteristics: it has a trigger interface underneath, it has a d-pad like interface on top, and it uses infrared to guide an onscreen cursor similar to a mouse cursor. This is not the same thing as a regular remote control, which has no onscreen cursor interface, just up/down/left/right buttons.

Where they would have problems:
Their biggest problem: the patent specifically says that the controller is the infrared emitter. The wiimote is the inverse of this and uses the controller as a receiver. Also, interlink has to prove that the wii is a "computer", not just a gaming device. Considering nintendo never marketed their console as a computer a la sony or microsoft, this is a gray area thats not so easy to prove.

Thrillhaus

EnigmaNemesis

Chef

http://mrr3000gt.mystarband.net/RBG/images/stock01.jpg

Kitt Thrust

protozoider

No problemo.
But when I heard they had patented those phrases, I understood that they were copyrighted like slogans.

Now, that is possible.

But of course no one is getting sued when they say or write it, but if you would sell a product using that exact phrase (therefore slogan), it's lawsuit action time!

Murteira_Nabo

No. I CAN blame them. Suing people frivolously is NOT what I call conducting "business". It is slowing DOWN business, and hurts consumers. Plus their claims are dishonest.

The world is better off if all such people crawled off and died. Does the world really need more pyramid schemers and telemarketers, and other parasites like these? What purpose do they serve?

"trigger operated electronic device"

Anybody ever play DUCK HUNT before?

"plaintiff has suffered damages"

Yes... because the Interlink device was selling so well until the Wii came out.

dcartist

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.

It is dismissable "out of hand". As I said, it doesn't even pass the "laugh test". Everything about this suit stinks of groundless extortion and nuisance suit.

Nintendo should sue these scumbags for encroaching on the patent for their light gun, which is a pointing device with a trigger used on a computer (the NES after all, is a computer, by every definition of the word, and uses a CPU).

The suit is a joke.

dcartist

I was just being snippy, my apologies. Patents protect ideas. Copyright couldn't hope to protect "That's Hot!" or "You're Fired!".

What's going on with these items, and probably the source of confusion, is that the parties attempted to register the terms for trademark protection. The federal agency responsible for those registrations is the Patent and Trademark Office. They handle both, but the two areas of law are very different.

My guess is they would seek protection for using those phrases on some form of apparel. People came to associate those phrases with Paris and The Donald (for a while, anyway), so one would expect that if you saw those words on, say, a t-shirt, you could be lead to think that the shirt was made under the control of Paris or The Donald.

Nothing unreasonable there. Trademark law is there to protect the consuming public (and this really is the case) as well as preventing people from trading on someone else's goodwill.

Throtex

It doesn't pass the "laugh test".

That is just a gyroscopic mouse with an infrared receiver. They should sue and be sued by any company that's ever built an infrared remote control, because a standard IR remote has more in common with this POS than a Wiimote does.

Shame on you, Interlink. Shame on you. Is your business really so badly in the toilet, that you need to file nuisance suits on the tiny possibility that people will pay you off to go away and die?

dcartist

No?... I could swear... Well, can't find a solid evidence so, you must be right. ;)
I apologise.

Murteira_Nabo

superbad

http://ferl.becta.org.uk/content_files/ferl/resources/coll...

You may remember that Nintendo owns a chunk of Gyration. None of their current products look like the one I used, though. Maybe Interlink is suing them too.

raindog

They're filing in Delaware because Interlink was incorporated there (as are like 50% of US Corporations). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_corporation

I don't think they'll eventually win, but I can see where they'd file the suit. No, it isn't frivolous, and yes, they have the right to defend their patent.

To those trying to set the kiddies straight, I applaud your efforts. Just wish I didn't have to go through pages of garbage to read it.

Nikolii

miniboss1232

The entire lawsuit is about the trigger. The court won't take anything about the IR information, the way it's used, what it's used for, blah blah, into account. Only the trigger matters here. Nintendo has to defend itself by proving that their placement and use of the trigger does not infringe upon Interlink's patent. That's going to be a toughy.

rasutoibuki

Actually, trademark law is probably some of the easiest IP to defend from a policy perspective, even something like UPS brown (if they even have a registered trademark for it -- I don't know off-hand). Things like color, shape, and other forms of trade dress are "descriptive" which, legally speaking, affords them no trademark protection. Well, that is until they acquire some "secondary meaning", meaning people will associate that trade dress with a product or service.

Why is this easy to defend? Trademark law is about expectations. Customers see a mark they've come to associate with a particular merchant, and they buy the product based on the goodwill associated with the mark. If you see an envelope with UPS' shade of brown on it, apparently you're very likely to think that it's a UPS envelope. It also protects trademark holders from other people who want to trade on the goodwill of their mark.

Stop and think about just how many products you can pick out from a lineup of similar products based on its color alone. It's pretty powerful.

As far as a copyright on 'Fred', that's not possible. A one-word phrase, especially a name like that, doesn't achieve the minimum standards for copyrightability. I should point out that copyrights are automatic; you don't need to do anything special to obtain one (though you may register your work with the Library of Congress if you like). In fact, I have a copyright on everything I just wrote in this comment (though I will happily allow Kotaku to display this comment).

Throtex

There are some interesting and stupid copyrights and trademarks. UPS has a certain shade of brown, and someone (I don't know who) copyrighted the name Fred.

Needless to say Patent Law and Copyright Law are some really messy, confusing, and often dumbfounding practices.

K-OSS

No, they didn't.

Throtex

Paris Hilton patented "That's hot!" and Donald Trump patented "You're fired.".

Any questions?

Murteira_Nabo

Yup, it doesn't make sense.
It's like the cross-shaped D-pad Nintendo patented.
Sega used the same design in its Dreamcast controller. They would only get sued by Nintendo if the working method of that d-pad was similar/copied.

Murteira_Nabo

Zenith

I realize that the Wii can be considered a computer device, my point was that this Interlink mouse is clearly intended for a PC and not a gaming device like the Wii. Therefore, it is ludicrous to think that the two devices could ever compete in sales, as they are in completely different categories and intended for completely different devices.

NameOf_A_VGChar

Patenting everyday activities is just wrong and reeks of SCO and RIAA-like legal extortion.

Coherent

K-OSS

Murteira_Nabo

Throtex

I hope it helps.

Throtex

Oh, and the Wii triangulates position with the aide of a gyroscope and 2 sets of IR LEDs.

That stupid Interlink thing is a mouse that's controlled with a pad, with an IR reciever. The difference is...

The Nintendo Sensor Bar doesn't relay information.

Go ahead and sue, Interlink, Because Nintendo's just going to laugh all the way to the bank.

Tsunamipepper

modifiedbears

Qui-GonJim

Again, read the claims. If you think you understand them, which you probably don't, then come back. Going through the comments, it seems that maybe one or two people have a grasp about what is being claimed in the patent.

I also want to point out that this patent is a continuation of a patent that was filed in 1995. If people are fishing for prior art, they need to go back at least this far.

And as noted above, Interlink makes this product.

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

That's probably the most substantive and accurate comment in this thread so far.

And I agree with most of what Fnor wrote as well.

"1) Asking for a temporary restraining order or injunction at the onset of trial won't get your case dismissed. If you don't ask for one, you're not doing your job."

Exactly. Most of the complaint is simply boilerplate language. If you were to compare 20 complaints for patent infringement, the only difference would be the patents-in-suit.

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

No. I think you're confusing it with trademark rights. If you're implying laches or estoppel, I didn't get that from the comment.

"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 is representative of another strange assumption made in a lot of comments. Does anyone know what communications have preceded the filing of this lawsuit? Perhaps, round after round of cease and desist letters? Perhaps discussions to bring it to an amicable solution or through the payment of a license? If you don't know, stop applying evil motives to Interlink.

My guess is people don't have a clue about what happened between these parties.

In general, sophisticated corporations go through several rounds of communications before instituting patent litigation. If you're going to make an assumption, assume that this was the last straw. Patent litigation is _really_ expensive and not entered into lightly.

Interlink isn't some fly by night company or some lonely inventor throwing his weight around.

A_B

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2...

link to patent

"Description is now made of a method of using the shooting scope according to the above described embodiment and the principle thereof. First, a player carries the shooting scope with the stock 7 on his shoulder, grasps the grip 6 by his one hand, and puts his other hand on the trigger switch SW1 and the reset switch SW2. When the player sights the target displayed on the television receiver 4 by the gunsight 10 and then, depresses the trigger switch SW1, an image of a part of the display screen of the television receiver 4 on which light is gathered by the lens 31 (an image in the vicinity of the sighting axis of the gunsight 10) is detected by the light receiver provided for the control circuit 33. The control circuit 33 amplifies and waveform-shapes a light receiving signal of the light receiver (a pulse signal having horizontal scanning cycle) and lights the LED 38 on the basis of the pulse signal. Consequently, an infrared signal which is synchronized with the light receiving pulse is transmitted toward the receiver 3. The receiver 3 detects the infrared signal from the shooting scope 5 and transmits the same to the video game set 1. The video game set 1 collates a coordinate position which is shot with a coordinate position of the target on the basis of a transmission signal from the receiver 3, to judge whether or not a bullet hits the target. At this time, the player depresses the switch SW1 and/or SW2 downward from above the barrel 8. However, the player grasps the grip 6 in the front part of the barrel 8 by his hand which is not used for operating the switch, and carries the shooting scope with the stock 7 in the rear part of the barrel 8 on his shoulder. Even if a strong force for depressing the switch SW1 or SW2 is exerted, the shooting scope can be held in a stable state without moving up and down. As a result, the target can be accurately aimed at. "

majortom1981

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

Not true. That's defending against a trademark. Patents can be enforced at the discretion of the holder.

Volante3192

Why was [one-click shopping] 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.

L_K_M

All these nitnendo patents existed before this company even thought this up.

Nintendo can even show prior art.

IF nitnendo shows there previous patents this case shouldnt even go to trial.

majortom1981

Interlink should've brought this forward FOREVER ago when the damn contoller pics started popping up ... the fact that they wait until release to press this shit is highly unprofessional and quite dubious ... what a bunch of squatting bitches.

dead_red_eyes

When a company settles, it's because they don't want the bad publicity or think it will be cheaper than taking them to court. It is not a "buckling", nor does it set up a precedence.

Also: It's a common trend to patent something and then not make it. A lot of tech companies do it for things they can make now, but won't be needed until someone invents another part much later. They're doing this a lot with the electric car designs, they know it will need a specific kind of engine, for example, and they know how to make that, so they patent it and wait for someone to make the battery.

iwanttobeasleep

RAMX

fillerbunny9

Go american legal system!

xpnet

PlaidNinja: You can bring a patent infringement claim any time within what the statute allows (5 years? I think? I don't do IP). The "launch" date is irrelevant.

That said, the patent is likely good, but the important parts (infringement is decided by elements, not as a whole) really aren't similar enough to nintendo's system to make them infringers. In particular the method of locating the pointer (the tech in dispute, really), is different, both because the wii remote is a receiver and theirs a transmitter, but because of the way that is then calculated by the hardware/software into the pointer on the screen.

That said, that's not enough difference to give Nintendo summary judgment. This will probably settle.

Fnor

manguero

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.

FlapjacksAreTasty

PlaidNinja

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.

FlapjacksAreTasty

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.

majortom1981

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

robo2112

Aesteval

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.

Raring

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.

FlapjacksAreTasty

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.

Raring

rbernard80

fillerbunny9

MJD

MJD

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

majortom1981

photoboy

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.

Koinu

RocketDarkness

NameOf_A_VGChar

L_K_M

BlindsidesDork

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.

der-Karl

Kaoru

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.

Improbable

BlindsidesDork

Jesse in Japan

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.

thelastslice

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.

NameOf_A_VGChar

Karttikeya

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.

str1cken

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.

nemyhlovecraft

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)

TaeK

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.

Gerko

Optimistic Prime

TitillatedOcelot

omgjuicyjuice

cablekiller

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.

o-kuma

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.

bassbeast

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

H0tSh0tZ1627

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.

kuskus

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

Quaga

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

hegemonyhog

Lider

I say nice try. No prize though.

Runna

?

rluzinski

H0tSh0tZ1627