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

Forums - Nintendo - Lawsuit filed against Nintendo over Switch’s detachable controllers

Puppyroach on 11 August 2017

The judge should make Gamewise pay damages to the public for raising such an idiotic lawsuit against Nintendo and wasting taxpayers money.



Around the Network
Cloudman on 11 August 2017

Ugh, another one of these? Seems like at least a few of these pop up whenever does a new console with an interesting twist. They always seem to show up when Nintendo has a success in their hands. I never even hear about these other products until lawsuits come up.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

monocle_layton on 11 August 2017
Cloudman said:
Ugh, another one of these? Seems like at least a few of these pop up whenever does a new console with an interesting twist. They always seem to show up when Nintendo has a success in their hands. I never even hear about these other products until lawsuits come up.

They probably do this for marketing. They come up in headlines, people buy their products - it's actually pretty smart



Insidb on 11 August 2017
vivster said:
As if this was true whatsoever. Nintendo is master innovator and there is no way tablets with controller peripherals existed before the Nintendo Switch.

/s?



Insidb on 11 August 2017

If any of the commenters on here are patent lawyers, please let me know.

I want to make sure that I never hire you lol.



Around the Network
caffeinade on 11 August 2017
monocle_layton said:
Cloudman said:
Ugh, another one of these? Seems like at least a few of these pop up whenever does a new console with an interesting twist. They always seem to show up when Nintendo has a success in their hands. I never even hear about these other products until lawsuits come up.

They probably do this for marketing. They come up in headlines, people buy their products - it's actually pretty smart

Gotta have a lot of pride to do that...
Or a big stomach.



pokoko on 11 August 2017

There are some curious statements in this thread.  First, this doesn't seem to be a "patent troll", not if they have an actual product.  Second, this isn't about who did what first.  It's about patents, pure and simple.  If they have the patents and can prove that Nintendo infringed upon them then they have a case.  It doesn't matter if Nintendo ever heard of them before or not.

Slarvax said:
"The company is looking to be compensated for damages and a ban on Switch sales." I mean, look man. You want money for the possibility that Nintendo did a similar product to yours, that's cool. But a ban on Switch sales? Like, do you really want to go on a legal battle vs Nintendo?
When was the last time Nintendo lost one of these?

They lost earlier this year in Japan regarding the go-cart thing, they lost to Phillips, and they lost over the 3D part of the 3DS.  That's off the top of my head.

In this kind of case, the skill of the filing legal team matters the most--along with the jurisdiction where it was filed.

Edit:  and the ban thing almost never happens beyond a temporary freeze.  It's there to put pressure on the other side.  The real goal is a settlement.



Green098 on 11 August 2017
pokoko said:

There are some curious statements in this thread.  First, this doesn't seem to be a "patent troll", not if they have an actual product.  Second, this isn't about who did what first.  It's about patents, pure and simple.  If they have the patents and can prove that Nintendo infringed upon them then they have a case.  It doesn't matter if Nintendo ever heard of them before or not.

Slarvax said:
"The company is looking to be compensated for damages and a ban on Switch sales." I mean, look man. You want money for the possibility that Nintendo did a similar product to yours, that's cool. But a ban on Switch sales? Like, do you really want to go on a legal battle vs Nintendo?
When was the last time Nintendo lost one of these?

They lost earlier this year in Japan regarding the go-cart thing, they lost to Phillips, and they lost over the 3D part of the 3DS.  That's off the top of my head.

In this kind of case, the skill of the filing legal team matters the most--along with the jurisdiction where it was filed.

Edit:  and the ban thing almost never happens beyond a temporary freeze.  It's there to put pressure on the other side.  The real goal is a settlement.

Nintendo won the case in March 2017 by a Fedral Judges ruling.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/20/federal-appeals-court-upholds-nintendos-win-in-3ds-patent-battl/



SuperNova on 11 August 2017

You can't patent the basic concept of 'detachable controllers', so their complain has to lie with design and functionality similarities and based on all of the pictures seen here they really don't have a case.

Also, why would they try to get a sales ban on Switch, when they could just cash in via royalties in case they win?



fatslob-:O on 11 August 2017
RaptorChrist said:

Not when it's a case that's purely created out of greed. I mean, Gamevice is going to need to take the stance that Nintendo stole their idea, and I would bet that Nintendo has never even heard of them before.

I assume you didn't see the big picture when making your post? Does this change your opinion?

@Bold Deflection LOL ... 

And no Gamevice doesn't need to prove that Nintendo willfully infringed on the patent, just that they did ...