By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - US Gov't investigating PS3's Blu-ray

NeoRatt on 22 March 2008
ssj12 said:
NeoRatt said:
These kinds of patent suits are happening all the time. Nothing to be alarmed about. But, I think Sony would be in a lot of trouble if Antitrust did an investigation as it is now a monopoly for HD Movie distribution.

 no they aren't

the entire BDA owns Blu-ray


Sony owns the key patents for the technology and licenses them.  Is it fair that Sony can sell a gaming console and blu-ray player for cheaper than companies typically sell just a blu-ray player?  And PS3 was sold at a loss to push blu-ray initially.  Can that be considered a fair business practice?  I'm no lawyer but I have seen a lot stupider stuff end up succeeding the US justice system.



Around the Network
ssj12 on 22 March 2008
NeoRatt said:
ssj12 said:
NeoRatt said:
These kinds of patent suits are happening all the time. Nothing to be alarmed about. But, I think Sony would be in a lot of trouble if Antitrust did an investigation as it is now a monopoly for HD Movie distribution.

 no they aren't

the entire BDA owns Blu-ray


Sony owns the key patents for the technology and licenses them.  Is it fair that Sony can sell a gaming console and blu-ray player for cheaper than companies typically sell just a blu-ray player?  And PS3 was sold at a loss to push blu-ray initially.  Can that be considered a fair business practice?  I'm no lawyer but I have seen a lot stupider stuff end up succeeding the US justice system.


 is that why Samsung has the cheapest Blu-ray Player on the market? 



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
famousringo on 22 March 2008
okr said:

Simple messages from some of you understood:
The companies using the technologies are good, because they deliver us our beloved toys. The scientists who developed these technologies over decades are bad and "patent trolls", even at the age of 90.

Sometimes, only sometimes, I'm not so in love with this website as usual.



 The patent system has been misused and abused so much that it's becoming hard to believe that it's ever used in an effective and appropriate manner anymore. There's very little confidence left in the system.

 I know it's going to be messy, but I very much hope that somebody comes along with the brass tacks to tear this system apart and put it back together so that it works again.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Untamoi on 22 March 2008
NeoRatt said:
ssj12 said:
NeoRatt said:
These kinds of patent suits are happening all the time. Nothing to be alarmed about. But, I think Sony would be in a lot of trouble if Antitrust did an investigation as it is now a monopoly for HD Movie distribution.

no they aren't

the entire BDA owns Blu-ray


Sony owns the key patents for the technology and licenses them. Is it fair that Sony can sell a gaming console and blu-ray player for cheaper than companies typically sell just a blu-ray player? And PS3 was sold at a loss to push blu-ray initially. Can that be considered a fair business practice? I'm no lawyer but I have seen a lot stupider stuff end up succeeding the US justice system.


 
This may come as suprise to you but even MS owns patents on BD. Some important codecs on BD are owned by MS.



Tavin on 22 March 2008
okr said:
Thanks @ mrjuju & superchunk.

@ Most other posters: Use Brain Training. Nintendo claims it helps (although not with me, I'm afraid: Dr. Kawashima sometimes says my brain is 60 or even older).

I think we all do not know enough about this subject, I only did some quick google research after reading superchunk's initial post.

But don't worry - nothing is in danger. None of the companies, none of the technologies. The case will be settled out of court some day just as the Rothschild vs. Philips case 11 days ago. The agreement was obviously that Philips gave millions to sponsor a "Philips Electronics Professorship" at her former university, Columbia University, NY (that's the ironic & funny part).

This is a very interesting topic. From her biography she was actually a pioneer and one of the world's leading scientists for this technology over decades. I think it's also interesting that she started with her work on this technology in the 50s, was hired then by Philips and worked for them from 1960 to 1985, before she became a professor at Columbia university.

Very interesting lady, indeed.

 Looks like people is just interested on trolling some famous scientist's claims than in investigating at least the smaller facts about her before calling her a "patent troll"

thanks for all the facts okr 



-- Live only for tomorrow, and you will have a lot of empty yesterdays today--

 Tavin:  "Old school megaman is THE BEST megaman"      courtesy of fkusumot :)

My mind has changed. My strength has not.    Kamahl, Fist of Krosa

 

Around the Network
ChronotriggerJM on 22 March 2008

Well for everyone defending her can you please bring up something in the limelight about her suing now >_>? Take a look at that list for about 1 second and try to find out why she's suing NOW. Traffic lights?!?!? Come on now.



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.

wfz on 22 March 2008

Would it be a good investment for me to make a patent on a hovering car? I mean hey, it's bound to be invented someday.



MattAAron on 22 March 2008

i dont get the topic title... 'Investigating PS3's BluRay'? Shouldn't it just be 'Investigating BluRay'...? Or were you just trying to take a stab at the Playstation name and put it down?



okr on 22 March 2008

ChronotriggerJM said:
Well for everyone defending her can you please bring up something in the limelight about her suing now >_>? Take a look at that list for about 1 second and try to find out why she's suing NOW. Traffic lights?!?!? Come on now.

The few of us were not defending her because we know she's right. I don't have a clue if she's right, but from what I read about the first suit it seems to me that Philips thought they'd lose the case and therefore settled it out of court.

The few of us were just defending a scientist against the random "burn the bloody old witch" posts in this thread.

And regarding the recurring traffic lights argument: Has anybody thought about the fact that technology changes over years?

"In the mid 1990s, cost-effective traffic light lamps using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) were developed; prior to this date traffic lights were designed using incandescent or halogen light bulbs. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_light



dellcomputersftw on 22 March 2008