ah well if thats all then don't let it bother you too much, all these suits always talk bs.

@psrock

Whether it fails or not, is not the case.

The case is, Sony did a blatant copy. Fact for everyone with a brain.

Now if Nintendo could stop the R4 flashcard from selling and sue Nyko because of their Nunchuck I think Nintendo should take a legall action on this.

The Dildo itself already is an half, if not complete, wiimote copy.
Now the nunchuk?

Somethings gotta be done.

It would be epic and fair if Sony had to pay Nintendo some royalties for every arc peripheral that was sold.

Bamboleo said: t2k said: Nintendo benefits from broadening the gaming market, suing every company/competitor that 'mimics' them, 'borrows' their 'ideas' presents Nintendo in a bad light and stops further growth of the gaming industry. In short: Nintendo are NOT Apple I wish Nintendo WAS Apple.   Sony would be forced to stop the rip off factory in no time.

again nintendo doesnt own motion controlls. in fact read my comment on page 3. also that midway employee is planning on suing nintendo

@ demitri55

Ninendo doesn't own motion controls but they own Wiimote and Nunchuk.

Which, as I said on the OP, were just copied by Sony.

maximus22 said: For the same reason you can't patent cold medicine. Different ingredients.

lol, this makes a lot of sense

Bamboleo said: @ demitri55 Ninendo doesn't own motion controls but they own Wiimote and Nunchuk. Which, as I said on the OP, were just copied by Sony.

how was it copied?? tell me the similarities?? from shape to button config to look. go on. dont bring up accelerators or anything else involving motion as nintendo does not own those rights.

psrock said: Bamboleo said: Well at least many 2006~2009 motion control trolls are now singing a different tune, finally they understood what evolution is. @ PSrock Copying success is not dumb, I agree, is a complete shame when you just talk shit about it, get butt raped in the market and need to imitate the very same device you trolled. If Sony just had a different stance from the beginning, everything would be different and they wouldn't be facing just an embarrassment that is copying the "underdog console" Why does it bother you so much, let them copy away, it's going to "fail" anyway according to some. I will buy the Wiimote instead for my PS3. I don't support pirating.

probably nintendo doesnt has a case.Regarding the success Chances of success of PS wand are slimmer than the Natal to be honest. PS3 buyers often disdain the idea of motion controls in the first place, and older games are not backwards compatible.A few wand supporting titles wont change the idea against it .I really see it hard being a big success, or any kind of success at all. Sony has failed several times in peripherals and modifications( sales:balance board vs eyetoy, DSI vs PSP GO), and i just cant fathom but only the most fervient sony fans to buy the wand even if the wand supporting games do not appeal them. If a player FINALLY decides to make the motion(despite 2 years of wm+) jump next year will be because of the natal, simply because is more different. And thats on the other system. I just think the wand has too many things against it to catch up. IF it does, eventually, it will be around the time of the next console cycle, which will be a little too late. Think about it: the wand introduction will happen with 2 or 3 big games designed for it.If those arent attractive.Or aimed to the "casual" market-that is not very Sony friendly, the sales wont be hot. The wand wont sell like hotcakes, and therefore, the PS3 wont sell any better. Remember, the customers will have the choice of Natal OR Wand.Or the already stablished nintendo library without extra purchases. At this point in the business, the wand has to catch up VERY fast to help sales. Before the next Nintendo console.And thats 2 years away at most.Sony will try for sure, they had bad experiences with the eyetoy after all.

Raze said: ... Yes and no, patents cover the mechanics of a device. If you read a patent, should it exist, it will read something like "Wired connectivity motion controller device accessory using BlueTooth technology" ...if the patent passes, then no one else can use that same method without permission. Obviously, diagrams of its functionaity must be provided. The point is, if Nintendo does hold a patent for the nunchuck, Sony cant just make a direct knockoff. They would have to add another clown nose to the left handed device, and allow it to be tracked by camera input only. Depending who has the original license for the tech on thumb sticks, Sony might not even have the capacity of adding a thumb control device to the unit ...

One note: a patent might be filed, and yet nullified in court when the owner tries to enforce it. At that point further prior art searches can be conducted and can demonstrate that the alleged infringer might be obviously extending a widely known idea or mechanic that predates the filing.

Which is all the more relevant if the fabled "arc nunchunk" is nothing but a lighter wireless controller with less buttons and only one analog stick. I doubt very much that any patent filed by Nintendo can be enforced to cover every wireless controller made to be held in one hand.

@bamboleo

i think your bias. just cause its sony they are copying?? how about if nintendo copied this?? and this is from 1999/2000. look he's using both a nunchuck and a main controller like the wii-mote. oh he's also planning on suing nintendo but its a little bit more complicated then your ordinary law suit. i know its wired and the wii-mote isnt but listen carefully it's a prototype and he clearly says there willbe a wireless version

the very first answer ended the thread ,,,


an idea is not patentable.method is.Sony's method for motion control is way different from nintendo's.

now later in the thread you talk about design infringement(the way they look).My answer is that first sony hasn't even revealed the look of the thing ,,second that is one of the most obvious thing that sony will make sure it looks different enough.The glowing ball alone makes the design infringement case pointless.I know cause i have taken the patent course in UNI.