Weren't the ones that made the Wiimote is another company (Gyration)??

It already have a patent, soooo.......?

What we need is a system of checks-and-balances that allows honest lawsuits but puts a penalty for frivalous ones.

At least the company here that has filed is doing something with its patent. It does seem that a lot of it will go into fine points of law and timing.

And we do need new law.

Mike from Morgantown

http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/wii-hit-with-another-patent-lawsuit/?biz=1

I love this news brief, especially the parts about Hillcrest "claiming" (article's word choice) to have 29 patents or it Hillcrest not providing any other details about the filng.

It may be a PR grab -- since it are trying to market a new product.

Mike from Morgantown

The patents in question here, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,158,118, 7,262,760, 7,414,611 and 7,139,983, are so vague that the first three which cover 3D pointing devices could be applied to almost any 3 dimensional pointing object and the fourth one which covers the interface for displaying information on a television screen could cover any sort of GUI that uses a TV.

This is the problem with the US patent system at the present. Anyone can scribble an idea down on a piece of paper and send it in and then if someone actually ever does create it you can then sue them for all they have no matter how vague or flimsy the link between the two things are.

Also first post here on the Chartz woohoo finally stopped my lurking.

Im interested to know how the remotes that Hillcrest has patents on relays the information to the computer/screen. If my understanding is correct, unless they are transmitting the data via Bluetooth, the Wii controller would not be infringing on the patent. They cannot claim that the use of light is the infringement, as the remote is the receiver of the light spectrum distributed by the sensor bar.

My thought is that Hillcrest doesn't fully understand the technology behind the Wii remote and is only going off of the fact that they both have accelerometers, which wouldn't be enough to claim infringement.